A Storm in a Soup Can?

Cross-posted over at the Corner:

TPM Muckraker has a rising-tide-of-intolerance type story over on its site. The topic? Soup.

Earlier this year, Campbell Canada introduced a line of halal-certified soups. The 15 soups comply with Islamic dietary regulations which, much like kosher regulations, prohibit certain foods and define the right way to slaughter animals. The line, which includes low fat cream of broccoli and vegetarian vegetable, was certified by the Islamic Society of North America, which has been certifying halal foods since 1988. To some people, that’s just more evidence that Sharia is coming to North America — this time, via the grocery store.

“M-m-good for the Islamists. Not so yummy for the rest of us,” reads the blog of Scaramouche, which broke the news Tuesday, some eight months after Campbell’s launched the line.
Robert Spencer, who writes Jihadwatch.org and has been saying for years that ISNA is tied to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood,* quickly echoed the alarm.

“So why is Campbell’s Soup rushing to do its bidding?” Spencer wrote on Tuesday. “’M-M-Muslim Brotherhood Good?’”

If the problem here is ISNA (and for some it seems to be), that’s something worth discussing, but Campbell’s should not be attacked on “halal” grounds alone. The company’s decision to offer a line of halal soups is, in principle, shrewd niche marketing and no bad thing (in its own small way it may even help integration along). It ought to be as uncontroversial as, say, selling kosher products or vegan snacks. Incidentally, Campbell’s halal soups are vegetable soups, but generally not described as vegetarian (I suspect the mysterious “fat” that features in the ingredients of most of them is to blame), but the animal rights discussion that revolves round halal food is a separate one.

If you are looking for a more genuine halal controversy, cross the Atlantic to Blighty, where there’s been a row over supermarkets and other distributors selling halal meat without informing their customers:

Britain’s biggest supermarket chains are selling halal lamb and chicken without telling unsuspecting shoppers.Those stocking meat slaughtered according to Islamic law include Waitrose, Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Somerfield and the Co-op. And a Mail on Sunday investigation has found that fast-food chains including Domino’s Pizza, Pizza Hut, KFC, ­Nando’s and Subway are also using halal meat without ­telling customers. But the UK’s second-biggest supermarket, Asda, has refused to confirm or deny whether it sells halal meat. The Mail on Sunday contacted Asda on Tuesday, but by yesterday it had failed to answer any of our questions.

Initially, Waitrose, Sainsbury’s and Tesco were reluctant to admit they sold halal meat. But later they confessed to selling Islamically slaughtered lamb. Tesco also admitted selling some halal chicken without labelling it as such. Most lamb imported from New Zealand by British supermarkets has been slaughtered according to Muslim law, but this is not mentioned on packaging. Some lamb from British abattoirs is also halal.

Last night, Agriculture Minister Jim Paice said: ‘People should know what they’re buying in the shops or when they’re eating out and I will be discussing with the food industry the role labelling can play in giving consumers a choice.’

Mr. Paice’s view seems reasonable, but read the whole (slightly overwrought) thing, and decide for yourself.

Posted in culture | Tagged , , | 23 Comments

Perfection is impossible

From the comments:

It is amazing that on a blog called SECULAR Right we have so many people here willing to pull the lever for someone about as far from “secular” as one can imagine. Have you all devolved to the point that selecting the “R” is all that matters? JFC, there other options–third parties, write-ins or just abstaining altogether (Ms.O’Donnell would at least like the sound of that). I don’t see how anyone who even just pretends to be s secularist can vote for this extremely silly person.

And another:

Well, the site is still “Secular.” Not sure about the “Right” bit anymore.

I detest people trying to tie religion into the resurgent conservative movement. It is a mistake, however, to try to paint people like D’Souza as representative of the Right in majority. That’s simply not even close to being true.

I’m reading these comments and I’m not seeing a lot of conservatism. Looks more like a typical raving moonbat thread over at DU, to me.

Posted in Blogs | Tagged | 37 Comments

DeMint Speaks!

Minority Jim speaks out:

“People are beginning to see that there’s no way we can pay the interest on our debt and every week, we’re borrowing money to pay the debt we have and are creating new programs that are costing more money,” he said. “Hopefully in 2012, we’ll make headway to repeal some of the things we’ve done, because politics only works when we’re realigned with our Savior.”

Well, fair enough about the spending, but quite where “our Savior” comes into it, I’m not sure.

And then there’s this:

DeMint said if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn’t be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who’s sleeping with her boyfriend — she shouldn’t be in the classroom.

Good grief.

Posted in politics | Tagged , | 9 Comments

Christine O’Donnell is one of you!

Ms. O’Donnell makes very explicit one of the aspects of contemporary right-wing populism. On the one hand it is surely true that the American Elite Establishment has become stagnant and calcified. On the other hand, do we really want Average Joes in the halls of Congress? Where only 25% of the American have a university degree, 99% of the Senate does (Mark Begich being the exception). Good or bad? My heart leans toward elitism, but my head isn’t so sure.

Posted in politics | Tagged , | 23 Comments

Another Brick in the Wall

Cross-posted over at the Corner:

At first glance, there is less to this Sunday Telegraph story than meets the eye:

Hundreds of girls are bring forced by British schools to wear the Islamic veil in a move which has been heavily criticised by mainstream Muslims. Islamic schools have introduced uniform policies which force girls to wear the burka or a full headscarf and veil known as the niqab. Moderate followers of Islam said yesterday that enforcement of the veil was a “dangerous precedent” and that children attending such schools were being “brainwashed”. The Sunday Telegraph has established that three UK institutions have introduced a compulsory veil policy when girls are walking to or from school…All three are independent, fee-paying, single-sex schools for girls aged 11 to 18.

Enforcing a primitive cultural observance of this type is grotesque (and it’s certainly not going to help integration along), but if the schools are privately-funded, this sort of thing is — within limits — up to them. Thus if the Jamea Al Kauthar boarding school wishes to ban family photographs, the cutting of hair or the removal of hair between eyebrows, that may be bizarre, but it is a matter between the school and the none-too praiseworthy parents who choose to subject their children to this nonsense.

That said, it would be interesting to know what criteria have been used by Ofsted (Britain’s state school inspectorate) in finding Jamea Al Kauthar to be “outstanding,” particularly given the fact that this doubtless rigorous inspectorate, an inspectorate untouched by multiculturalist dogma of any kind (if anyone believes that, I have a bridge to sell them), apparently had nothing to say about the dress code at the Madani girls’ school in East London, of which some details follow below:

“The present uniform conforms to the Islamic Code of dressing. Outside the school, this comprises of the black Burka and Niqab.”

The admission application form warns girls will be “appropriately punished” for failing to wear the correct uniform, and its website adds: “If parents are approached by the Education Department regarding their child’s education, they should not disclose any information without discussing it with the committee.”

Something to hide?

Most troubling of all is the suggestion that such schools may be en route to becoming “free schools” under new (and, in principle, praiseworthy) legislation introduced by Britain’s coalition government, legislation that goes some way to following the excellent Swedish precedent of allowing independent groups to set up their own schools — and then receive taxpayer support.

Anastasia de Waal, deputy director of think-tank Civitas, said: “We now have a scenario where schools such as [Madani or Jamea Al Kauthar] will be able to apply to become free schools, under the Government’s policy, and therefore receive state funding. We need absolute clarity on what the position is going to be on such applications.”

Indeed we do. How about rejection?

Posted in culture | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

Playing the Victim

This report caught my eye:

Former U.S. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich screened his Catholic documentary “Nine Days That Changed the World” Monday night in Washington Hall and urged the audience to carry the film’s lessons into an increasingly secular nation. “Nine Days That Changed the World,” produced and narrated by the former speaker and his wife, Callista, chronicles Pope John Paul II’s historic first visit to Poland in June 1979 and the subsequent beginnings of the solidarity movement that overthrew the Polish Communists in 1990… At the end of the screening, the Gingriches greeted audience members and posed for photos with members of the College Republicans.

“It’s easier to be an atheist in America than a Christian,” Callista – a lifelong Catholic – told The Observer after the screening. Callista said there are many parallels between Poland under its communist regime and America today. “You see people that want to take down crosses or cover crosses. You see opposition to school prayer,” she said.

Oh good grief. I’m the last person to defend some of the stupidities of excessive separation-of-church-and-state symbolism, but just pause for a moment to take a look at the photograph below.

I took it in the churchyard of St. Stanislaw Kostka, Warsaw, during the final months of communist rule (in September, 1988, to be precise). Four years earlier, its parish priest, Jerzy Popieluszko, a fierce anti-communist and Solidarity supporter, had been beaten up and murdered by three secret policemen.

The heroic Fr. Popieluszko was very far from being the only martyr for his faith in the more than four decades of Communist dictatorship in Poland. To make the sort of comparisons that Mrs. Gingrich has apparently been making is to insult their memory.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Knowing My Religion

An entertaining Pew survey showing that atheists and agnostics are better informed about religion than their theistic counterparts has raised a few eyebrows. I’m not convinced it’s such a big deal. As Daniel Larison records, there’s this detail:

Data from the survey indicate that educational attainment – how much schooling an individual has completed – is the single best predictor of religious knowledge. College graduates get nearly eight more questions right on average than do people with a high school education or less.

Fair enough, but then there’s also this:

…Atheists and agnostics also outperformed believers who had a similar level of education.

Most satisfactory.

With complete absence of modesty I can reveal that I scored 100% on this test.

Again, most satisfactory.

Superficially, my result may appear to be a triumph for the agnostic/completely indifferent/Church of England subset of the population but in reality it’s just a reflection of a very traditional (and, I suspect, largely vanished type of) English education. This involved a decade or so’s worth of daily (or twice daily) attendance at chapel and the inclusion of “scripture” as a regular part of the schoolroom syllabus. Spiritual speculation, the supernatural, “enthusiasm”, meaning-of-life chatter and all the other clutter were kept to a bearable minimum. The gap (such as it was) was filled by rousing Victorian hymns, amiably absurd (and reassuringly traditional) ritual and, of course, a study of religious texts–more Joe Friday than Good Friday–that has proved an invaluable historical and cultural resource ever since. That’s the way to go, I reckon.

After all, who can argue with 100%?

Posted in culture, data | Tagged | 12 Comments

Godwin’s Pope (3)

One academic’s (the Eli Black Professor of Jewish Studies at Dartmouth College) response to the pope’s claim that the Nazis were atheists (in reality, some were and some were not) can be found here. An extract follows:

Christian theologians, Catholic and Protestant, reassured Germans that Nazism was in full accord with Christian principles. This was not a marginal effort; at the 1934 Oberammergau passion play, watching Jesus being hoisted on the cross, the audience saw a parable of the Third Reich, calling out: “There he is. That is our Führer, our Hitler!”

Hitler became Christ, the redeemer of Germany, thanks to a reinterpretation of the Gospels: Jesus was not a Jew, but an Aryan who came to redeem them from the Jews who sought their destruction. Karl Adam, the prominent German Catholic theologian, affirmed in 1933 that Hitler was the one “prophesied by our poets and our wise men” who suffered in his fight for Germany’s salvation. Adam continued in 1941: “Christ’s teaching was entirely anti-Jewish in its tenor (that is why he was crucified).”

Nuts, of course, but atheist?

Well, here is Hitler (cited in Table Talk) on October 24, 1941:

It’s senseless to encourage man in the idea that he’s a king of creation, as the scientist of the past century tried to make him believe…The Russians were entitled to attack their priests, but they had no right to assail the idea of a supreme force. It’s a fact that we’re feeble creatures, and that a creative force exists.”

Hitler’s comments on this topic are often contradictory, and often self-serving, but those remarks do not sound like the opinions of an atheist to me.

Posted in history | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Dinesh D’Souza’s poison

Forbes magazine has now “fact-checked” Dinesh D’Souza’s infamous September 27 cover story, “How Obama Thinks,” and has uncovered one “slight” misrepresentation, it says, of an Obama speech on the BP oil spill.  Such a “fact-checking” feint is irrelevant to this travesty of an article; you can’t “fact-check” a fever dream of paranoia and irrationality.  Sickeningly, while “How Obama Thinks” is useless as a guide to the Obama presidency, it is all too representative of the hysteria that now runs through a significant portion of the right-wing media establishment.   The article is worth analyzing at some length as an example of the lunacy that is poisoning much conservative discourse. Continue reading

Posted in culture, politics | Tagged , , | 96 Comments

The Rise of the Orthodox

Via The Economist:

Just 42% of adult Israeli Jews define themselves as secular, according to recent official figures. The rest range from mildly to devoutly religious. And because the most religious seem to have the most children, the secular figure is likely to keep shrinking.

In this demographic and cultural scene, politics is more than ever a matter of finely calibrating a religious-secular balance. The latest effort to tip things the religious way comes from Eli Yishai, leader of the largest Orthodox party, Shas, who is minister of the interior. He wants his ministry’s computers to rest on the Sabbath. Specifically, he wants to prevent people paying their bills online on a Saturday. Predictably, the strongly secular and left-wing Meretz party has tabled a bill requiring all government computers, as opposed to human civil servants, to keep humming 24/7.

The minister in charge of government efficiency, Michael Eitan of the Likud party, which has both religious and secular supporters, suggests that the computers be programmed to receive online requests from citizens on the Sabbath but to respond to them only afterthe Sabbath. What about requests from Muslim or Christian citizens? Mr Eitan has yet to offer an answer.

Sigh.

Posted in politics | Tagged | 9 Comments