Jon Condon in Beef Central news briefs 23 September 2014 wrote:” Global halal food market worth $1.6 trillion by 2018.” Dubai is a major centre of that trade and Australia only manages to supply 9% of its imports. Brazil is the major supplier.[ http://www.beefcentral.com/news/beef-central-news-briefs-23-september-2014/] This trade could be under threat from extremists.
The “aggressive social media campaign” which was undertaken against the South Australian Fleurieu Milk and Yoghurt Company in early November has been successful. That company has terminated its $50,000 contract to supply halal yoghurt to Emirate Airlines. One of the major charges in this campaign was that fees from halal certification are being used to fund terrorism.
The attacks were quite harsh and social media was apparently followed up by vicious phone calls to the business. The sales and marketing manager pointed out; “The social media laws are quite hard to police.” “You can get on there and say whatever you like in fake accounts, but what we are trying to put across is these business that you are approaching, in our case, our farmers, they are just trying to be viable. They don’t deserve this hate mail, and neither do a lot of the other businesses that are getting it.”
While the company may be able to save its business and the jobs of its employees, this campaign is not an isolated one. Hatred of Islam, fuelled by police raids and foolish political commentary, has led to an intensification of Islamophobia. Whenever there is some association of the Muslim community with either terrorism or gang related crime, the whole community suffers. Mosques are attacked, hijab wearing women are assaulted, Muslims are abused in the street.
One form this Islamophobia is taking is the waging of anti-halal certification campaigns.
The main argument used for Scriptural opposition to the consumption of halal meat by the fundamentalist Islamophobes relies upon the assertion that Allah, the God of Islam, is a false god, an idol. Paul of Tarsus, the founder of what became Christianity, is quoted in his First Letter to the Corinthians, as stating verses 20-21 “…when pagans sacrifice, what is sacrificed by them is sacrificed to demons who are not God. I do not want you to share with demons.”
While this is associated clearly with sacrifice upon the altar in a religious rite, Paul goes on in verses 25-29 to state: “Eat anything that is sold in butcher’s shops: there is no need to ask questions for conscience sake since To the Lord belong the earth and all it contains. If an unbeliever invites you to a meal, go if you want to, and eat whatever is put before you; you need not ask questions of conscience first. But if someone says to you, ‘This food has been offered in sacrifice,’ do not eat it, out of consideration for the person that told you, for conscience’s sake-not your own conscience.”
However this was not the policy of the followers of the Gospel in Jerusalem. Presumably while Paul was in Jerusalem visiting the disciples and the Head of the Ecclesia, James the brother of Jesus, what became known later as the First Council of Jerusalem made a decision about food. The only record we have is from the partisan of Paul, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles, but even this is remarkable. Acts verses 28-29 records: “It has been decided by the Holy Spirit and by ourselves not to impose on you any burden beyond these essentials: you are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from illicit marriages.” This was of course based upon the assumption that the basics of the Torah were known and understood, with the avoidance of the forbidden animals including pork and the maintenance of the method of kosher slaughter, which ensured that the animal was free from blood.
Today this decree of the First Council of Jerusalem is largely ignored, except by those who want to use it in propaganda against halal food.
Notwithstanding the extremist Christian slander that Islam is a form of paganism, we should be aware of the stand of the main Christian body, the Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II when in Nigeria in February 1982, stated quite clearly to Muslim religious leaders: “ We both believe in one God who is the Creator of Man. We acclaim God’s sovereignty and we defend man’s dignity as God’s servant. We adore God and profess total submission to him. Thus, in a true sense, we can call one another brothers and sisters in faith in the one God. And we are grateful for this faith, since without God the life of man would be like the heavens without the sun.”
Moslems (Muslims) Australians deserve what it has been dished to them, they are a bunch of cowards, and the leaders here are just like their leaders overseas.
The Law in Australia section 119 of the Commonwealth constitution protect the right of religion practice this would apply for halal food and the second marriage of Moslems.
The Australian Jews are very strong community they will defend them selves all the way to the High Court of Australia, they force Palpitations to enact Laws to protect them, unlike Moslems.
The Jews have forced enacted Laws as follow;-
1- No one can make the German sign swash sticker
2- No one can be against the Jews (Anti-Jewish)
3- No one can be anti Semitic
4- No Politician can be against Israel in any way shape or form.
5- No one can deny that there was a Jewish Holocaust
6- The Politicians are forced to enact Laws against Moslems
Yet pathetic Moslems Leaders are refusing to even assist me to enforce the existing Laws that Protect Moslems, the Laws that Judges refuses to accept.
Judges refers to Moslems as religion and not members of the human race (Homo-sapiens) Race are protected under the Acts but not the Religion, in due course Moslem Australians loss on Justice, thus deliberately they are served with injustice.
Moslems need Laws to protect them just like that of Laws that protect Jews and Sikhs.
We need to be recognised (Moslems collectively) as a Race and a Law against Islamophobia, that is anything is against what Moslems do or practice is a form of Islamophobia, which would be classified as Racial Vilifications.
I need the Moslems leaders to contact me to take the proper actions.
All religious communities in this country defend their rights and we all expect our governments at local, state and federal levels to respect those rights.
The Muslim community engages with all other communities and in Victoria there are anti-vilification laws. There are strong anti-discrimination laws in all states as well. We have to ensure that they are implemented.
Islamophobia is an increasing problem and it must be opposed by broad engagement with the community, so Islam is understood better, and by encouraging the Muslims to know their religion better. Hatred of “the other” is based on ignorance and we must strive to overcome that.
why call us islamophobes, when we have every right to know what we eat and where the money that we spent goes!oz is one of the most expensive countries when it comes to food and now islam wants us to ay more? Why? To appease a minority? So that with halal cert they can bring in sharia law, as quiet and shady as the halal cert? Or is it just that you MOSLEMS look at us like dhimmis, as your foul prophet called anyone that does not agree with the utter rubbish he preached.
Islamophobia is hatred of Islam based on ignorance and a sense of racial or cultural superiority.
“When it comes to halal, ongoing campaigns against it are little more than anti-Islamic bullying,” Race Discrimination Commissioner Dr Soutphommasane told the Centre for Research in Education annual oration last Thursday in Adelaide. He clearly identified the source of much of this hysteria. The Race Discrimination Commissioner said that there has been a noticeable rise in anti-Muslim sentiment during recent months, “amid community anxiety about the threat of terrorism”. “Many Muslim communities have made clear to me their concerns about the safety of their members, especially women who wear visible Islamic dress such as headscarves.” He argued that anti-Muslim sentiment “should have no place in our society” and said that there is frequently a racial element to anti-Muslim feeling. [The Age November 14, 2014]
How would the abolition of halal certification help our meat exports to the Muslim world? Brazil already far outstrips us.
I do hate Islam. I have a right to hate Islam and it’s atrocities. Islam is an ideology. All ideologies and religions are to be scrutinized and criticized and can be, without the defense of “bigot” and “racist”. Religion isn’t a race. Therefore it cannot be racist to passionately oppose an ideology. I can’t wait for the day sheeple realise that some magic man in the sky was a man made idea, and not REAL! Then we will have peace. But with Religion comes control and power, so I guess as long as we have masses with low IQ’s we will have religion.
Islamists have been successful in building the Islamophobia industry: it diverts attention from activities they would probably prefer not be noticed, such as promoting sharia law in the West, stealth jihad, and a push to implement a global Islamic caliphate, among many others.
“Islamophobia” is a widely used yet vague and controversial term referring to anti-Muslim bigotry. In recent years, identifying, monitoring, reporting on, and working to ban Islamophobia worldwide has been a major focus of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
You need to stop playing the victim and stop participating in “taqiyya” and stop wanting to change the countries that you move to, only then will you be able to assimilate successfully into Western countries. I refuse to accept Islamaphobia as a word in the English language.
The United Nations is not playing “taqiyah”.
Annan calls for action to combat rising Islamophobia and anti-Semitism
UN News Centre
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=9432&Cr=Islam&Cr1=
13 January 2004 – United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today issued a strong call for action to address rising Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, warning that complacency in the face of intolerance amounts to complicity.
Delivering the inaugural Robert Burns Memorial Lecture at UN Headquarters in New York, Mr. Annan criticized those who remain silent in the face of bigotry, saying “such passivity must not be allowed to masquerade as tolerance.”
The Secretary-General noted that Islamophobia – a new word for an old phenomenon – is one of the most disturbing manifestations of bigotry today. Since the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, “many Muslims, particularly in the West, have found themselves the objects of suspicion, harassment and discrimination,” he said, adding that too many people see Islam “as a monolith, and as intrinsically opposed to the West.”
……………….
The U.N. chief further expressed his rejection of generalizing negative typical stereotypes against any religion on the ground that some of followers committed some wrongdoing.
He also said “no certain western categories are entitled to harass Muslims and discriminate against them while on the other hand, claim being the defenders of values of equality, justice, tolerance and human rights”.
Some idea of what “sharia ‘aw” actually means might be helped by this article, from a non-Muslim academic.
http://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-sharia-law-and-does-it-fit-with-western-law-31972
Do you have the guts to recommend that your audience reads some serious dissections of Islam such as “The Third Choice” by Mark Durie? I can provide plenty of other references if that’s not enough.
The expertise of Mark Durie was dealt with by VCAT.
Mark Durie and his expertise on Islam
Islamic Council of Victoria v Catch the Fire Ministries Inc (Final) [2004]
VCAT 2510 (22 December 2004)
Last Updated: 29 December 2004
VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
ANTI DISCRIMINATION LIST VCAT REFERENCE NO. A392/2002
Extract:
http://www.worldlii.org/cgi-worldlii/disp.pl/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2004/2510.html?query=%7e+mark+durie
374
Perhaps you should do some research. Ignorance and hatred are not a good combination.
Insofar as the admissibility of Dr Durie ‘s evidence is concerned, I find that he does not have the necessary expertise to give evidence concerning the Qur’an and the approach of Muslims to such material such as the Hadiths which are part of the understanding of the Qur’an. It is clear that he took no interest in this area until after the atrocity of September 11. He admitted:
Tradition is important, I respect that, but traditions are founded on principle guidelines, those principle guidelines are more important than the tradition. What I mean is that if our ability to better represent the principle guideline is discovered then being true to the principle should over-ride the tradition.
As time goes by humanity innovates; technology and the sum of knowledge increases in ways that reveal new solutions to old problems, we seem to encounter conflict between the Authority of the Prophets and new ways to interpret or express the principle, but the truth is that the Prophets recommended the best practice available at the time to serve the principle, it doesn’t mean that new and more effective ways to serve the principle will not be revealed.
In essence; the Law doesn’t have to change but how it is enforced definitely should, for example: if the Law states “Do not steal” then doing so is punishable by Law and there may be a traditional punishment, but in time you may find ways to prevent theft and you may find more proportionate and effective ways to punish the crime.
No one can dispute that Allah is just; as humans we obey his wisdom and righteousness, if we fail we should welcome punishment to absolve us from failure equal or greater than what Allah would deliver, better to face the wrath of man than the wrath of Allah, but the problem is if we as a society punish a criminal in a way excessive to what Allah would then we take the excess unto ourselves and will face that Judgement before Allah.
So it is better for society to punish crime less and leave the difference up to Allah. We also know that some people escape punishment by society altogether and these are the most unfortunate, for when they face Allah they will feel the fullness of his wrath.
But our job as society is to deliver the most equitable punishment suiting the crime, but to remember that justice is the prevention of crime from happening or happening again, a victim deserves compensation but an offender needs redemption and a society has a duty to protect its citizens, to balance these three principles requires wisdom and righteousness, not impulse or emotion, not popularity or price.