ltclarke says:

I think this will happen in the end, cause right now with food prices rising no politician wants to be the one that stopped an action that might help.

You will also prob see this as a marketing too

“Free range, pork feed free chickens!”

Mr. Gawd Almighty says:

#34, Bobbo,

Next time read the article before spouting off.

Second paragraph;

But the proposal has outraged animal rights campaigners, Muslim organisations [sic] and other groups. They claim the move would put families at risk, offend religious sensibilities and lead to a major consumer backlash.

Fourth paragraph,
The RSPCA said it had major concerns about the health risks involved, while agriculture experts warned that many consumers would be offended by the idea of a return to the use of animal remains in farm feeds. …

From the linked article,
His view was backed by supermarket managers. ‘Waitrose would not condone this or use feed with animal by-products in our poultry supply chain,’ said a spokesman.

Now, lets see what your rant is about,

‘There are two million Muslims in Britain and 25 million in Europe and this move would be a disaster for every one of them,’ said Dr Abdel Majid-Katme of the Islamic Medical Association. ‘This is a sinful idea.’

So how is it Muslims are now trying to make everyone else conform to THEIR dietary practices? As silly as those practices might be, in their little world it is wrong to do it. I see nothing about forcing others to follow their ways.

***

#30, Pirate,

You’re still a trolling asshole. Go fuck your self with your little wee weenie.

bobbo says:

#35–gawd==once again we look at the same evidence and arrive at opposite conclusions?

The evidence is the Muslim Dr wants to make it illegal to sell pork fed chickens. I call that forcing their religious beliefs on others. Not forcing would be to allow pork fed and non-pork fed chicken to be accurately labeled and let consumers choose what they want?

How am I wrong?

Mr. Gawd Almighty says:

#37, bobbo,

… once again we look at the same evidence and arrive at opposite conclusions?

We aren’t looking at the same evidence and seeing different things. You are seeing things.

The evidence is the Muslim Dr wants to make it illegal to sell pork fed chickens.

There is nothing in this article about ANY Muslim group trying to make this illegal. If you had of read the article you might have noticed it is already illegal !!! The suggestion is to use this valuable protein source to feed chickens which would mean a change in the law. There are several groups voicing their objections, each giving their reason.

Mr. Gawd Almighty says:

#40, Pee Wee

And the Muslim objection is because its sinful. Bringing religion into a debate that should rely on science pretty much means they have no scientific reason so they go to their fall back position, that being their whiny religion.

The Muslim Doctor thinking that his religious practices should apply to a decision involving everyone is where he is wrong.

Idiot !!! In THEIR religion they don’t eat pork. That is their culture and that is the way they like it. No one here has defended that culture as being correct or scientific other than to say that is the way it is. The man was asked how Muslims would would react to the change and he replied.

You, though, had to get your bigoted little pecker shaped mind in an uproar about how Muslims want to change the world. The sole comment by the Iman was the impact changing the policy would have on his people. He made no comment about how this would effect ANYONE ELSE. His reply is as deserving of respect as that of everyone else that answered.