Skip to comments.
British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus
ThisIsLondon.co.uk ^
| Friday 09.05.08
Posted on 05/09/2008 2:36:28 PM PDT by Joiseydude
For decades the national dish has been a staple meal on the national carrier.
But now British Airways has taken beef off the menu for economy passengers amid concerns about its "religious restrictions".
The airline has instead switched to a fish pie or chicken dish option for the so-called "cattle class" passengers.
BA's second-biggest long-haul market is to India, where the majority Hindu population do not eat beef because of their beliefs.
(Excerpt) Read more at thisislondon.co.uk ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: airlines; ba; beef; hindus; pc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: Joiseydude
One would think that being called “cattle class” would be MORE offensive to Hindus...
21
posted on
05/09/2008 3:10:24 PM PDT
by
Doctor Raoul
(Fire the CIA and hire the Free Clinic, someone who knows how to stop leaks.)
To: rovenstinez
It a conspiracy by the Chick-a-Filet cows I tell you!
22
posted on
05/09/2008 3:11:13 PM PDT
by
Doctor Raoul
(Fire the CIA and hire the Free Clinic, someone who knows how to stop leaks.)
To: ronnie raygun
Last I heard, peanuts were removed from the airlines a few years ago so people with peanut allergies wouldn't come in contact with them.
23
posted on
05/09/2008 3:14:58 PM PDT
by
Hillarys Gate Cult
(The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
To: Joiseydude
Green peppers offend me.
At this rate BA is going to have nothing on their menu. Not that it was very good food to start with.
24
posted on
05/09/2008 3:17:30 PM PDT
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(A good marriage is like a casserole, only those responsible for it really know what goes into it.)
To: Joiseydude
Good grief. Which religious group will they cater to next?
25
posted on
05/09/2008 3:20:31 PM PDT
by
Marysecretary
(.GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL)
To: Joiseydude; rovenstinez; infantrywhooah; econjack; acoulterfan; kromike; ZX12R; steve86; ...
From the article:
"It has nothing to do with the fear of causing offence - we always offer alternative meals for people with special dietary requirements if they order in advance.
"We are still serving beef based meals on certain menus in First Class and Club World and are currently deciding on whether or not to use beef on the menus for World Traveller customers for the winter season."
The Hindu Council UK said: "The Hindu community will welcome this decision and the news it has been made partly because Hindus don't eat beef.
"Hindus have a great deal of respect for British culture and are well integrated into the British way of life, so it's good to see evidence of how they are literally flying the British flag by choosing British Airways.
"That said, Hindus are tolerant of the beliefs of others and do not expect everyone to stop eating a food because they do not eat it."
In the past three months world beef prices have risen from about £2,500 a tonne to more than £4,000 a tonne, largely because of the weakening dollar and rising feed costs.
BA also said that cost is not a reason for the decision to stop serving beef.
And:
Although the BJP and Congress Party both seem keen on banning cow slaughter throughout India, it looks as though dissent from other parties has blocked the move for the time being. Some critics protest that cow worship is a strictly Hindu idea that must not be imposed on others in a secular state. I agree.
But I go further. I hold that cow slaughter and beef eating are proven Hindu traditions of old. This has been recorded by any number of scholars of the Vedas and epics. Let me give as an example Nirad Chaudhuri's passages from The Continent of Circe.
Vedic literature shows great love for and pride in cattle, as is to be expected of a pastoral people. Love of cows in the Vedas goes with "every possible economic use of cattle, including, of course, their slaughter for food". The Vedic spirit continues into the age when epics like the Ramayana and Mahabharata were written.
Chaudhuri notes that a debate had already begun between those who opposed and those who defended cow slaughter. The two ideas co-existed, very much like the debate today about vegetarianism. The Mahabharata mentions, "without thinking it necessary to add any excuse, that a very hospitable king used to have 20,100 cattle slaughtered every day for his guests." On the other hand, another story tells of a king who has slaughtered a cow to entertain a sage, an act that is criticised as sinful by another sage.
Such differences of view are a key characteristic of Hinduism. It has never been a rigid, Semitic-style religion with a chief pre-late laying down one single interpretation of holy texts. From ancient times some Hindus opposed cow slaughter, but many others regarded it as not merely permissible but obligatory to show honour to guests.
By the time the Dharma Shastras were penned, beef consumption had "ceased or virtually ceased". Nevertheless, the play Uttara-Rama-Charitra, one of the most celebrated versions of the Ramayana written by Bhavabhuti in the 8th century AD, has the following dialogue between two hermit boys at Ayodhya, Saudahataki and Dandayana.
S: What is the name of the guest who has arrived today with a big train of women?
D: Stop joking. It is no less a person than the revered Vasishta himself.
S: Is it Vasishta, eh?
D: Who else?
S: I thought it was a tiger or a wolf. For, as soon as he came, he crunched up our poor tawny heifer.
D: It is written that meat should be given along with curds and honey. So every host offers a heifer, a big bull, or a goat to a learned Brahmin who comes as a guest. This is laid down in sacred law.
Today, with the Hindutva bri-gade in full cry, such a dialogue in a modern play would probably cause a riot and be banned.
Yet, this was uncontroversial in its time. Clearly, the notion that the cow is sacred is merely a sectional Hindu view. It is by no means traditional Hinduism or essential Hinduism. If anything, it is a recent reformist Hinduism. I have no objection to reformers, but I object vociferously when they pretend to speak for all Hindus, or for essential Hinduism.
Some Vishwa Hindu Parishad types say that the cow gives milk which is essential for rearing all of us, so the cow is our mother, and hence deserves to be protected from slaughter. Chaudhuri remarks caustically that the "relationship is expressed not in terms of economics or animal husbandry... but as a matter of ethics, as if one was speaking of a man's relationship with his wet nurse."
On this supposition, the buffalo is an even greater mother of Hindus than the cow, as buffaloes in north India provide more milk than cows. But nobody worships the poor buffalo. Indeed, the buffalo is ceremonially sacrificed as part of Hindu worship in parts of eastern India.
In Vedic times, neither untouchables nor tribals were regarded as Hindus. Even when the first census was enumerated in the 19th century, dalits and tribals were not counted as Hindus.
But such is the power of modern upper caste Hindu imperialism that it now claims as its own these two groups whom it cruelly reviled and oppressed through the ages. Dalits and tribals have always eaten beef.
Yet, the VHP brigade (and its camp-followers in the Congress) claim unhesitatingly that Hindus do not eat beef. A ban on cow slaughter would be an imposition on hundreds of millions of dalits and tribals, no less than on non-Hindus.
I have long opposed a ban on cow slaughter as a secular liberal. But in the light of Bhavabhuti's narrative, I also oppose the ban as a beef-eating Hindu. I am following in the footsteps of Vasishta, no less.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/144132.cms
26
posted on
05/09/2008 3:22:02 PM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: CarrotAndStick
I stand humbly corrected; my laziness is to blame here.
;)
27
posted on
05/09/2008 3:29:50 PM PDT
by
kromike
To: CarrotAndStick
I didn’t read all that, but I think I got the gist of it. This can go on to infinity. I think that was my, and the like mindeds point. Why should anyone care what you eat or don’t eat. I have this problem all the time in fast food joints or diners. Sometimes I can order what I want, sometimes I get what I get. I assume that what is served on these flights is no charge. So, don’t eat it. Where this leads is to a wasteland of silliness. Correction...we are there.
28
posted on
05/09/2008 3:41:51 PM PDT
by
ZX12R
To: Doctor Raoul
One would think that being called cattle class would be MORE offensive to Hindus... Not to mention the implication that nobody has to worry about THEM flying First Class...
29
posted on
05/09/2008 3:43:16 PM PDT
by
Titan Magroyne
("Shorn, dumb and bleating is no way to go through life, son." Yeah, close enough.)
To: Doctor Raoul
One would think that being called cattle class would be MORE offensive to Hindus... Not to mention the implication that nobody has to worry about THEM flying First Class...
30
posted on
05/09/2008 3:48:09 PM PDT
by
Titan Magroyne
("Shorn, dumb and bleating is no way to go through life, son." Yeah, close enough.)
To: CarrotAndStick
I didn't read all that, but I think I got the gist of it. This can go on to infinity. I think that was my, and the like mindeds point. Why should anyone care what you eat or don't eat. I have this problem all the time in fast food joints, diners and the free food (usually some goulash) Krishna line on campus. Sometimes I can order what I want, sometimes I get what I get. I assume that what is served on these flights is no charge. So, don't eat it. Where this leads is to a wasteland of silliness. Correction...we are there.
P.S: I didn't read all that, because I simply don't regularly feel the importance of considering what Hindus think, believe, or eat. Throw in Arabs, Muslims, Persians, Asians, Eskimos, Mormons, Antarcticans, Jedis, Werewolves, etc, etc.
31
posted on
05/09/2008 4:00:37 PM PDT
by
ZX12R
To: Joiseydude
this is nauseating...
they just offended their entire country so as not to offend foreigners
why don't the brits just run up the white flag and be done with it.
they are the new surrender monkeys, and now make the french look positively courageous
32
posted on
05/09/2008 4:00:40 PM PDT
by
Chode
(American Hedonist ©®)
To: infantrywhooah
Hindus did not demand this. There is nothing quoted in the article to indicate that the airline was worried bout sensitivity or political correctness — that’s the headline writer’s interpretation. The only complaint is from the marketing organization for beef producers, and what would you expect them to say?
The official line, which I don’t see any reason to disbelieve, is that this was a business and customer service decision. They only have room for two meal options, and it made more sense to have two options that aren’t automatically ruled out by a large percentage of their customers. Not to mention (and BA didn’t mention) that chicken and fish are probably cheaper.
I have to ration my outrage these days, and this story doesn’t come close to making the cut.
To: Joiseydude
There are no words to describe my sadness at how far the Brits have fallen. Who could have imagined this, from the very same country that fought the Sepoy Rebellion.
Irony is not strong enough a word...
To: infantrywhooah; steve86; ZX12R; CarrotAndStick; metmom
“India has a large population of Hindus.”
True
“Indians wear turbans on their heads.”
Some Indians do and the ones that do uniformly across the community are Sikhs who are a small minority.
“Is that connection clear enough or do I have to write it in crayon for you?”
Considering your knowledge of India (and turbans, if I might add) is no better than that of an average 3-yr. old, I recommend that you stick to crayons.
BTW, not a single Hindu organization asked for this ban. British Airways went ahead with a decision based on economics and is using PC to justify that decision and forestall understandable consumer indignation.
35
posted on
05/09/2008 5:23:45 PM PDT
by
indcons
To: infantrywhooah
36
posted on
05/09/2008 5:28:07 PM PDT
by
indcons
To: infantrywhooah
India has a large population of Hindus. Indians wear turbans on their heads. Is that connection clear enough or do I have to write it in crayon for you? Spell it out, please. Just what are you trying to connect here?
37
posted on
05/09/2008 6:07:06 PM PDT
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: Joiseydude
What a bunch of wimps. Could the Brits sink any lower? How about just telling Hindus and Muslims not to eat the pork and beef. Don’t they realize what they are doing and how spineless they have become?
38
posted on
05/09/2008 6:47:19 PM PDT
by
calex59
To: calex59
How about just telling Hindus and Muslims not to eat the pork and beef. It's a pretty simple solution. I don't expect them to ban food for others that I wouldn't eat; I'd just not eat it.
39
posted on
05/09/2008 7:59:37 PM PDT
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: calex59; Darth Tokarev; Chode; Titan Magroyne; metmom
"How about just telling Hindus..."
Telling what?
From the article:
The Hindu Council UK said: "The Hindu community will welcome this decision and the news it has been made partly because Hindus don't eat beef.
"Hindus have a great deal of respect for British culture and are well integrated into the British way of life, so it's good to see evidence of how they are literally flying the British flag by choosing British Airways.
"That said, Hindus are tolerant of the beliefs of others and do not expect everyone to stop eating a food because they do not eat it."
In the past three months world beef prices have risen from about £2,500 a tonne to more than £4,000 a tonne, largely because of the weakening dollar and rising feed costs.
BA also said that cost is not a reason for the decision to stop serving beef.
I'm sure the price of beef more than doubling over time didn't have anything to do with this. Backslash Sarcasm.
40
posted on
05/09/2008 9:06:53 PM PDT
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson