Pork or nothing: how school dinners are dividing France

[FrodosPet]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/13/pork-school-dinners-france-secularism-children-religious-intolerance

The battle over national identity is being played out on children’s lunch plates. Is scrapping a pork-free option a victory for secularism – or just an example of religious intolerance?

Angelique Chrisafis
Tuesday 13 October 2015 12.08 EDT

When Aïcha Tabbakhe, a French nurse, went to fill out the forms for her children’s school dinners in her small town outside Paris, she was puzzled. The box she would usually tick to say that her Muslim children didn’t eat pork wasn’t there. “Confused, I called the town hall and I was bluntly told: ‘From now on, that’s the way it is,’” she said. “Pork or nothing.”

After years of French controversies over headscarves, pork has become the new battleground in the nation’s uneasy debate over national identity and the place of Islam. Bacon and sausage school dinners are being used by rightwing politicians to hammer home what it means to be French. Court battles and vicious political spats have erupted as protesters warn that controversial menu changes are sending a message to Muslim or Jewish children that to be truly French, they must eat roast pork. Politicians, as they go to war over the ham on school dinner plates, are fighting about the true meaning of French secularism and whether it has been hijacked and twisted by the right in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks.

Tabbakhe’s home town of Chilly-Mazarin – a town of about 20,000 people in L’Essonne, which nudges up against Orly airport to the south of Paris – is the latest of several run by rightwing mayors to announce they will scrap pork-free options in school canteens in the name of secularism. For 30 years, Chilly-Mazarin has provided non-pork alternatives to Muslim and Jewish children. But from November, that will stop. On days when the menu features dishes such as roast pork with mustard and courgette gratin, or Strasbourg sausage and organic lentils, or ham pasta bake, children whose families don’t eat pork for religious reasons will be offered nothing but the side dishes. The new mayor, Jean-Paul Beneytou, from Nicolas Sarkozy’s rightwing Les Républicains party, says this is a commonsense way to preserve public sector “neutrality”. But many parents, teachers and leftwing opposition politicians call it a deliberate stigmatisation of Islam that is cruel to children by playing politics with school lunches.

~ snip ~

As delicious as such a French school lunch looks and sounds, it's not for everyone. There are plenty of other ways to promote secularism than to give the options: Violate your beliefs or go hungry.

[Marrah_G]

1. No vegetarian options?

[emsimon33]

181. This is one reason I do not care for France. As a vegan, it was very difficult to eat in Paris.

The UK is marvelous if you are a vegan, Buddhist, Muslim, Jew, etc. But France....no! I found a Buddhist restaurant near where I stay in Paris and they have vegan options but otherwise is it grim.

[LoveIsNow]

182. Vegetarianism is practically unheard of in France.

A French acquaintance once laughed in my face like I was crazy when I told her I was a vegetarian.

[struggle4progress]

2. How asinine

[MADem]

3. They won't go hungry. They will get the side dishes.

Vegetables, noodles, yoghurt, flan, salad, bread, etc. Probably not a bad idea to bring along a little peanut butter for the bread on pork days....

But let's not be unclear about what is happening, here--they're making a blunt point, using food, that France is going to be SECULAR and they aren't going to make any accommodations for religious sensibilities.

[Major Nikon]

4. I believe local school districts are still free to make whatever accommodations they want

The difference is due to a recent court ruling they are no longer required to do so, and at least some of them are cancelling options that ultimately costs them more money.

[MADem]

5. Good. nt

[LuvNewcastle]

6. I agree.

They can just skip the meat dishes on the days when pork is served. They won't go hungry; in fact, they might be better off.

[SpartanDem]

8. There are reasons other than religion why people don't eat pork or any meat at all

this is just dickish on the part France, but they're French so it's pretty much par for of the course.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

9. My sons are vegetarian

and there was never any vegetarian meals offered here in America.

I sent lunch them to school with lunch.

[Major Nikon]

17. True

There's also reasons why people don't eat gluten, eggs, peanuts, milk, honey, and countless other ingredients. There's also reasons why all of those special dietary considerations aren't accommodated.

[pnwmom]

14. Right. They also don't give special meals to Catholics who observe meatless Fridays.

And that's okay. All of these kids will have sufficient food to eat. But it won't be dictated by their religions.

[Comrade Grumpy]

41. Hell, when I was in school, every Friday we got fish. Because Catholics.

I generally think schools should accommodate students' dietary preferences. And they shouldn't be messing with them to score xenophobic political points. That's a Tea Party-style move.

[pnwmom]

70. I assume you grew up in the US, not France. Their Constitution doesn't have the same

protections for religion that ours does. Because of the role the Church played before the revolution, their Constitution has a very strong wall between Church and State without the protections for religion that ours does. ANY religion.

[MADem]

87. Pan pizza was also an option.

The French just don't care what your religion is, though. They will serve "French" food and if you don't like it, you can bring your own. Jews are in the same boat on pork days, and when le boef is on le menu, the kids from India need to make other arrangements, too.

America does not have a tradition of cuisine, we steal from everyone, so the issue would not be seen the same way in USA, not just for the "cuisine" but for the fact that we don't have a secular nation in the same way that France does. We have God splattered everywhere, on our allegiance pledges, our oaths, even our money. It's not separated, like it is in France.

This is not really all that new in France--there are a lot of people who do not want to yield their "French character" to foreign influencers. They want people who come to France to assimilate, not the other way around. This has been an issue since before the headscarf wars--it pops up every now and again, and I don't think it will go away any time soon.

[tblue37]

144. Many kids from India are vegetarians for religious reasons, so pork is off their list, too. nt

[Aerows]

157. Me, too

You knew on Friday you were getting fish. Thankfully my school had some pretty good cooks.

[Snobblevitch]

184. In my grade school,

on Fridays we either got fish sticks and peanut butter sandwiches, grilled cheese or peanut butter sandwiches, or macaroni and cheese and peanut butter sandwiches. They figured that if a kid did not like fish, grilled cheese, or macaroni and cheese, they would at least eat the peanut putter sandwiches. Myself, I put the fish sticks inside the peanut butter sandwich.

[Aerows]

185. And everybody got a meal.

Good heavens. I would have never imagined people getting in a tizzy because, surprise, a Catholic school serves fish on Fridays, and one in New Orleans serves red beans and rice on Monday.

[LittleBlue]

46. Do the Catholics ask for it?

Grew up Catholic and nobody but my one grandmother observed Friday fish night. Even our Catholic school didn't mention it, we ate whatever we wanted on Friday.

If a large group of religious students asks for it, the state should attempt to accommodate them within reason.

[pnwmom]

71. Theirs is a country with a constitution that has a much stronger wall between church and state

than ours does.

They don't have the mindset to ask because, due to their history -- which is why the Constitution was written that way -- they appreciate that wall the same way we take for granted the freedom of religion.

They are pro-secular and anti-clerical and their Constitution reflects that. They aren't against the Muslim religion in particular. They are against the state promoting ANY religion.

[Comrade Grumpy]

97. Does the French constitution demand that Muslim students be served pork?

I understand secularism, but this just seems like a dickish move from xenophobic rightists. You do know that that's who is pushing this stuff in France right now, right?

[MADem]

118. No more than it demands Jewish kids be served pork, or Hindu kids served beef.

It's not like the parents can't opt out and send a lunch along on the days that the food isn't to THEIR cultural liking.

What you are insisting is that the Islamic culture must trump the French culture, and what the French are saying is .... "Non!" French culture comes first--if you do not agree, you work around that.

We have a different attitude in USA, but we are much more multicultural than France. We don't HAVE a "Ministry of CULTURE" here--they do.

One of the Minister of Culture's duties is to maintain the French identity.

The rightwing IS pushing this, but they are getting a lot of support from people who do not agree with them at all on other matters. This is one of those issues that crosses party lines.

The French are not like us in this regard--they have a wall between church and state. We have a beaded curtain.

[Aerows]

158. I can't speak for everybody

But at my school, you ate fish on Friday. It was like clockwork.

[hughee99]

28. Peanut butter? In a school? The children will be accused of terrorism when a hazmat team

in full gear comes in to place the peanut butter in a lead lined container and send to be tossed off the shores of Somalia with the reset of France's nuclear waste.

[MADem]

61. That's "only in America." They're learning that it's the hysterical attitudes of American parents

--aided and abetted by hyperbolic medical advice--that cause most (not all, there are always exceptions--but most) peanut allergies in the first place. Hyper-cleaning is another problem--if you don't let a kid play in the dirt, he won't give his immune system a workout.

There are very few peanut allergy sufferers in Israel, but from infancy Israelis get a peanut snack regularly.

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2015/02/new-peanut-allergy-study-means

[yellowcanine]

40. "they're making a blunt point, using food" Which is just wrong and mean.

At minimum the children should be offered a non meat main dish option. This is wrong and mean. What an unfortunate lesson to teach young children. Go against your religion or go hungry. Sorry, a couple of side dishes do not suffice. Growing children need complete meals.

[MADem]

56. You'll have to take it up with the schools that are doing this.

They don't regard their decision as wrong or mean. They believe--if I am to understand the article correctly--that conformity in the consumption of this particular meat creates a cohesive attitude; it makes them "more French."

You can argue that this point is stupid, sure, but the French are very protective of their culture, to the point where they have government agencies that decide which words can be used.

Again, no one is going hungry. That's hyperbole. Look at the picture--there's more than enough food on that tray even without the meat. And forewarned is forearmed--a mother of a Muslim, Jewish or 'vegan' child can send along a jar of peanut butter on pork days, and the kid can just slap some of that on that bread, if they feel their child isn't getting enough food.

The alternative is for the parents to protest, but again, for those schools that are going "hard line" on this, that's probably not going to do any good. They are hammering home a CULTURAL point. This is no different than outlawing face-shielding veils. I would imagine they regard this as a "When in Rome..." type of thing--if you want your child educated in a French school, they will have the full "French" experience; the French cannot enjoy a nice wine with their meal in Saudi Arabia, either--because those are the "food rules" in that nation.

Americans do tend to be shocked when a country/culture doesn't bend over backwards to accommodate differences. This is because homogeneous cultures don't feel a need to do this--they do the "majority rules" routine, and expect the minorities to do whatever work-arounds they need to do on their own.

[yellowcanine]

65. I disagree. People have different food preferences and civilized societies respect them.

Substituting a non meat main or alternate meat option would be a small accommodation to make. Frankly, it is insulting to tell people to "just eat the side dishes." My vegan colleagues get really pissed off when that happens at a conference and I don't blame them. Food is supposed to be about hospitality, not a cultural weapon. With their culinary tradition one would think the French would understand that. BS that the French "cannot enjoy a nice wine with their meal in Saudi Arabia" btw. And that "French School" you are talking about? - Here is a shocker for you - it is as much the Muslim child's school as the pork eating French child's school.

[MADem]

69. You aren't the French government, or the mayor of the towns implementing this, so

your 'disagreement' holds no sway.

Americans are not used to not having choice. It's one of the things that is quite remarkable about USA, how the country accommodates people and tries to make everyone's requirements part of the national fabric.

And, apparently you are woefully unaware ( BS that the French "cannot enjoy a nice wine with their meal in Saudi Arabia" btw) of the Saudi's strict laws against consumption of alcohol in their country--here is some light reading to educate you on that topic:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/13/karl-andree-briton-350-lashes-saudi-arabia-david-cameron

Further, you are confusing church and state in your last sentence. There is no "Muslim child" in the equation as far as the government is concerned. There are French children, and they will be accommodated in a "French" way. They are a SECULAR nation, and rigorously so, these days.

People who don't fit in are free to make their own accommodations, but the French schools that are doing this "no choice" menu do not feel it is their job to make exceptions--and the government is backing them up. That's why this is a story--it's a change to previously made accommodations that the French believe are undermining their culture.

Europe is not as "lefty" as many people imagine. They can be rigid and intolerant, too. Or "secular," depending on one's POV.

[yellowcanine]

80. No but I am a human being and this is a question of human rights. So yes, my opinion matters.

And in spite of the current headlines, people do drink in private homes and at private parties in Saudi Arabia. Probably a good idea not to haul it around in your car, though. And refresh my knowledge again - what one can or cannot do in Saudi Arabia with wine is relevant in what way to this case? Because the Saudis don't have religious freedom the French are free to discriminate based on religion? Kind of a low bar, dontcha think?

[MADem]

81. It's not a question of human rights. No one is stopping people from bringing

their own food on pork days, or on lamb days, if people don't like lamb. No one is being discriminated against--if you don't like that French food, you don't have to buy it and you can bring your own. No one is stopping you. The menu, though, in the French school, will be French food, prepared in the classical fashion.

By overstating the case, you diminish your argument.


I'd suggest you go back to the original argument that the French make, because you seem to have lost the bubble. This is not about "religious freedom." France is a SECULAR state. That's why they won't accommodate religious peculiarities. They'll do things the FRENCH way--and people who don't like it can make their own accommodations.

As I've said, Americans are so accustomed to being accommodated that they think the whole world is like us--it's not. In fact, there are lots of places that have laws that we would consider downright intolerant--but again, as I said "When in Rome..."

The Saudis, though, don't allow people to make their own accommodations, They aren't saying, "Well, we won't provide it, but HEY--BYOB, nothing to worry about!" They are saying the very opposite, that they don't allow ANY alcohol in KSA--because if they are caught, they get hundreds of lashes, or worse. And, FWIW, advocating law breaking as a "solution" to this prohibition is just not on. Total fail, that.

[yellowcanine]

83. We disagree. And they will back off on this. Just watch.

[MADem]

91. Yes, like they backed off on the hijab law.

Which, errrr, they didn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering

And it was UPHELD in the Euro court, too:

The law was challenged and taken to the European Court of Human Rights which upheld the French law on 1 July 2014, accepting the argument of the French government that the law was based on "a certain idea of living together".[9]

French identity is a big deal to the French.

[Comrade Grumpy]

98. You're right. I'm not the right-wing xenophobe nationalist mayor of that town.

And I don't support right-wing xenophobe nationalist crap like this.

[MADem]

101. Take it up with the European court.

They backed France on the hijab law, based on the same "cohesion" argument.

[mercuryblues]

141. by that definition

they are also anti-Semite. They are not making accommodations for any religion.

[pnwmom]

72. France has a very strong wall between the State and Religion. This isn't an attack on Muslims.

It's a refusal to make an exception to their Constitutional guarantee not to build religious exceptions into their policies and practices.

The Constitution isn't a Muslim Constitution or a Christian Constitution -- or even a Constitution with religious guarantees. It is a SECULAR constitution that makes no special provisions for anyone's religion. Catholics who want meatless Fridays also don't get special food. They can eat the salad, the bread, etc., just as the Muslims can when the meat offering happens to be pork.

To understand this, you have to understand French history and why they wrote a Constitution that took religion out of the equation. And you have to understand that our Constitutional guarantees for religion, the ones drilled into our heads since childhood, are not a part of the French mindset. The wall between Church and State is.

[Comrade Grumpy]

99. This is absolutely an attack on Muslims. By right-wing xenophobes.

You shouldn't risk hurting you back bending over so far to support it.

[MADem]

110. Not an attack on Jews, though?

And when they serve beef, they are -- or are they not -- attacking Hindus?

They aren't "attacking" anyone. They are simply being hard-liners about their culture. As they always have been. They are equal opportunity "attackers" when it comes to disregarding religious accommodations.

I've never been a fan of beets--if they're on the menu, I'll bring my own lunch.

I remember, decades ago, when they pitched a fit about the use of the term "Le week-end." They ended up losing on that word, but they weren't having that bastardization of their language go unchallenged. The battle continues to this day: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/8820304/Frances-Academie-francaise-battles-to-protect-language-from-English.html

The French are INTO their culture--and anyone who gets in the way of it, who tries to change it or water it down, is going to have to go through quite the long, weary battle to make that happen. They just do not cede their cultural imperatives easily. And the European Court has backed them up on that, at least as concerns the hijab law.

They're not unlike other countries in this world in that regard.

[redgreenandblue]

115. Who decided that pork is the "secular" choice?

It is quite clearly an example of instituionalized bigotry when one group gets to define their preferences as the norm.

Dietary customs are only superficially about religion.

"Why don't gays just get married to women like everyone else?"

[MADem]

129. The French eat three times as much pork as Americans do. It is a staple meat in France.

See the link at post 128 for more details.

[pnwmom]

73. NO ONE can enjoy wine with their public meal in Saudi Arabia, the French or anyone else.

And they risk arrest, imprisonment, and whippings even if they do it in private.

Because of the laws promoting religion in Saudia Arabia.

[yellowcanine]

78. "public meal" - now you are qualifying it in a way which it was not qualified before.

Shift goalposts much? Privately people do drink wine and other alcoholic beverages in Saudi Arabia. Practice is quite different from official policy in spite of the headlines.

[MADem]

84. You're pretending a school lunch is a private meal?

Please--you're the one shifting goalposts if you're trying to push home that public/private distinction.

Further, it is illegal to drink alcohol in KSA--publicly or privately.

It is NOT illegal to eat pork--or say NO to the pig, and bring a falafel from home--in France.

[yellowcanine]

85. Put words in people's mouths much?

Of course that is what I said.

[MADem]

89. Do you always confuse a question with someone putting words in your mouth?

The question was asked BECAUSE your statement created the impression that you were making an unsupported claim of equivalence.

So clarify, do.

[Lyric]

122. I don't think that the proper role of government is to enforce "culture".

Particularly when it hurts children.

[MADem]

125. I think you'd get an argument from most of the world, there--we're one of the few that does NOT have

a culture ministry.

Here, have a look: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_minister

Children are not being "hurt." The menu is not a state secret. Parents can give them a sack lunch or a supplemental item on the "Oh, pork" (or "Oh, beef" or "Oh, whatever little Francois is allergic to..." days) if they can't make do with the sides, bread and dessert.

[Skittles]

7. silly

there should always be more than one choice

[Boudica the Lyoness]

10. Not at the schools my sons went to in America.

They never offered vegetarian meals. My sons took their lunch with them.

[Skittles]

15. hence, the operating word SHOULD

[Boudica the Lyoness]

19. You said it like American schools had their shit together

and the French schools were arseholes for not giving the little nippers a menu like they were sitting up front on a BA flight or something.

Let's straighten up our own house before we shit-talk the Frenchies.

[Skittles]

20. I am not shit-talking anyone

I simply stated it was silly to only have one choice

[Facility Inspector]

26. It's cost-effective to have limited choices

It's school lunch, not Burger King.

[yellowcanine]

42. BS on that. No choices = wasted food.

Go to a school cafeteria and watch what gets dumped in the trash cans if you don't believe it.

[Facility Inspector]

43. or you can send a lunch

with the kids.

[yellowcanine]

48. Or the schools could quit being bigots and accommodate minor religious differences in food choices.

[MADem]

179. And they could accommodate the "minor religious difference" of public prayer before

the start of class, public prayer before the start of sports games, and a public prayer before the noon meal ... because ....'bigotry' against 'evangelicals' otherwise?

It's a slippery slope. The French have a WALL--not a gauzy curtain--between church and state. They won't accommodate ANYONE's religious differences, and the Islamic (to say nothing of Jewish and other faiths' as well) objections to this meat have everything to do with prohibitions that are spelled out in RELIGIOUS texts.

As far as the French are concerned, it is their culture and they aren't going to allow any religious considerations to impact their secular decisions. They are not like Americans in this regard. We accommodate religions, and we especially accommodate the less typical ones (likely out of fear of being accused of that very "bigotry" you fear).

At the same time, we don't accommodate the irritating child whose daddy tells him to wave his bible around at school....because "separation of church/state." We crack down on the "common" faiths, and exalt the exotic ones.

I like the way the French do it. BOOM--no religious accommodation. For anyone. Their attitude is pretty plain: You want to live here? Deal with it. Fit in. Don't expect us to cater to you--you need to join the club and act like the rest of the group. People who can't deal with that should probably not look to France as the place to put down roots--they'd do better in USA or Canada.

[1939]

74. Not in my school

Old Miss Irongirdle stood watch over the tray return. If you still had food on your tray, you were sent back to finish it. That is why i brown-bagged.

[MADem]

94. I will bet that happens in French schools, too!

Only it's Mademoiselle Ceinturedefer doing the inspecting!!!

[1939]

120. Those old spinster teachers

Probably started many a young boy on a path to misogyny.

[MADem]

123. Who knows? Maybe some of them came to love a strong woman!! nt

[SoCalDem]

117. Exactly..

If YOUR child has dietary issues, it's on YOU to see that they take lunches that are on their "menu"..

Most school lunches are macro...not micro.

and these days, the menus are often even published online so you know when they need a "home" meal.

[1939]

21. I can never remember having any more than one choice

which was why I "brown-bagged" it all the way through elementary, intermediate, and high school rather than letting them slop the glop on my tray..

[hifiguy]

121. Mystery meat, a potatolike substance

a vegetable and dessert. That's what I remember from elementary school in the mid-late 1960s.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Im not religious at all, and I dont touch the stuff.

Pigs are too intelligent, too high up the food chain for me to feel comfortable eating them.

YMMV, of course.

[Major Nikon]

18. Pigs would eat you if given the opportunity

[Warren DeMontague]

22. But of course. Can ya blame em?

hell, i'd eat me, too.. if given the opportunity.

[Major Nikon]

23. You'd taste just like pork

America has become quite well known for the numerous serial killers that have terrorized the public throughout history. However, many people may not have heard of Joe Metheny, a deranged killer who did more than just horrify everyone in the media and society.

Metheny was arrested back in December of 1996 in Baltimore. He was convicted of killing three people, but admitted to having killed at least 10 during his reign. Things get worse, though.

New information about this case recently came up, including the fact that Metheny ended up selling the flesh of his victim’s at the burger stand he used to run. The deranged individual said that no one could tell the difference between the human meat or the pork that he had mixed together. He simply saw the people he killed as meat and nothing more.

http://www.lolwot.com/serial-killer-joe-metheny-sold-his-victims-flesh-in-burgers/

[hifiguy]

58. I've read that human meat was referred to as "long pig"

back in the days when cannibalism was actively practiced in parts of the south seas.

[Warren DeMontague]

76. isn't there a Simpsons thing about "long pig"?

Long Pig. Mmmmmm.

[Major Nikon]

82. That was Plopper the Pig, AKA Spider Pig

[AngryAmish]

30. Eat me, pal!

Hehe

[Warren DeMontague]

77. See, but unlike you, I always know where I am.

Can't beat the convenience!

[Erose999]

161. Feed 'em to the pigs Errol..

[justice1]

12. I live in a village and we are able to reasonably accomodate every child.

I work in food service at our elementary, and we have children that are only allowed soy milk, have peanut allergies, to a kid being allergic to red dye 40. We always have substitutes for the main entree.

[yellowcanine]

44. "We always have substitutes for the main entree." Exactly.

I can't believe how many are defending those who would promote a one size fits all school lunch.

[MADem]

178. That used to be the paradigm. And everyone survived.

If what's on offer doesn't suit your needs, the lunchbox is a good option.

A "one size fits all school lunch" is not the end of the world. It's a shared experience. School uniforms are another good "leveler"--you don't have one kid wearing Walmart and being mocked by the kid wearing Dolce and Gabbana.

[pnwmom]

13. The Muslims will be in the same position as Catholics who choose to observe meatless Fridays.

If they don't eat the pork in some meals there will be plenty of other food on their plates.

Since the revolution France has been firmly secular and anti-clerical. I don't see a problem with them maintaining this position with regard to Muslims.

[MADem]

100. Jews take a hit, too. So do kids from India who don't eat beef.

I don't think they slop the food on the plate like in America, either--the child has to ask for the item, or tell the server what they want. That will cut down on waste.

[Arugula Latte]

16. They shouldn't accommodate religion; they should accommodate non-meat eaters.

Leave religion out of it. A lot of us don't eat cows and pigs for many reasons other than the stupid Abrahamic religious nonsense.

[hifiguy]

59. This seems reasonable.

Though a vegetarian option would be sensible these days.

[Marr]

93. Agreed. /nt

[smirkymonkey]

24. What are the reasons that Muslims and Jews don't eat pork?

Just curious. I don't know why pork would be different from any other meat.

[Act_of_Reparation]

25. Because God doesn't want them to.

Likely, the prohibitions are related to the difficulty of raising swine in a desert environment, but at the end of the day you aren't going to find too many Jews or Muslims describing their refusal to eat pork in ecological terms. Their holy books tell them the pig is unclean, so the pig is unclean.

[Lizzie Poppet]

29. Back then (and for may centuries after), trichinosis was a deadly threat.

Particularly in a desert environment where meat spoils so quickly. Inculcating a superstitious dread of the stuff via religion was the easiest way to get people to stop poisoning themselves.

[FrodosPet]

32. That's what I always thought

People respond to "Because the Big Guy said so" works better than "this delicious stuff is more likely to make you sick so please reconsider".

[Lizzie Poppet]

36. Powerful stuff back then, for sure.

Powerful today, for some...

[smirkymonkey]

33. But that no longer holds true in the modern world, so there is really no religious reason not to eat

it. It seems like it started out being a practical, health reason that was just worked into the religion to prevent illness. If they know that was the reason, why would their god have a problem with them eating it now?

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. Yep. Rare pork is absolutely an option these days.

I can't say why they don't think their god would be hunky-dory with pork these days...I don't really "get" theism at a deep level.

[yellowcanine]

57. Actually - no. "Closer to rare" yes, but not rare.

145 degrees, to be exact. That is not rare. It is medium rare.

http://twentytwowords.com/pork-can-be-pink-the-usda-says-its-now-safe-to-eat-pork-closer-to-rare/
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/articles/meat-and-poultry-temperature-guide.html

[Lizzie Poppet]

60. Good to know!

I very seldom eat pork (I'm a pescatarian, but I don't always resist the siren song of bacon), so it's not a matter of concern to me, but that's still good to know.

[yellowcanine]

66. And that assumes completely safe handling of the raw pork.

Frankly, in some food establishments, I would not be so sure of that. Well done for me, and still quite hot when it gets to the table, thank you.

[Arugula Latte]

39. There's really no reason to buy any of this religious nonsense in the modern world.

Let's face it -- Muhammud did not ride a winged horse to heaven, Jesus didn't come back from the dead and he's not returning to Earth, ever, Morini the angel didn't give golden plates to Joseph Smith, ol' Yahweh the angry sky deity didn't really speak to Moses, and so on and so forth. That people still believe these myths are "true" in modern times is mind-boggling.

[hifiguy]

63. And as dumb as those beliefs are

(and boy, they're dumb), the young-earth creationists manage to make those foolish assertions look like Heisenberg.

[Arugula Latte]

67. Very true.

[hifiguy]

79. Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

[smirkymonkey]

88. LOL! That is one of my favorite episodes!

But it's funny, I watched that episode about the origins of Mormonism and thought, "god, how could anybody be so stupid!", but when you really think about it the Abrahamic creation myths are pretty stupid too. It's just that they have been around a lot longer so we have kind of become used to the nonsense.

[progressoid]

90. Classic!

[snooper2]

145. because mythology is big business for the few "heads" of each religion

[LeftinOH]

34. There isn't any reason. Pious nonsense...

..unless one is a vegetarian/vegan who eats no meat whatever. But seriously - specifying which animals one will or will not eat, based on ancient rules is silly.

[yellowcanine]

47. Pork is more likely to carry diseases transmissible to humans.

In the past when the ability to properly store and cook food was more limited this meant that people got sick and died from eating pork more often than other meats. Many religious dietary codes can be traced to some hygienic reason which might not necessarily apply today, given our better understanding of disease transmission.

[Marrah_G]

54. It goes back to history and food preparation

If pork is not killed and cooked correctly it can make you very sick.

This is why the Bible also forbids shellfish.

[smirkymonkey]

148. However, the reason no longer exists. It may have made sense in ancient times,

but it doesn't in modern times. There is no logical reason for this to persist. It's not like "god" is going to strike them dead or anything.

[Marrah_G]

151. I dont disagree, but religion isn't about logic.

[GreatGazoo]

27. How 15th Century of them. They are reviving the Inquisition.

The legacy in Spain is explained here:

The ubiquitous Serrano ham legs hanging in restaurants and homes across the country are the legacy of public displays of pork-eating — prohibited by Judaism and Islam — by new or pretending Christians hundreds of years ago.

"Those never seen eating pork became suspects of the Inquisition," says historian Sebastian de la Obra, director of Casa Sefarad, a museum of Sephardic culture and tradition in the Andalusian city of Cordoba.

http://theweek.com/articles/445777/spain-decides-make-persecution-jews--but-wont-same-muslims

[hifiguy]

64. Serrano ham,

and every other kind of Spanish jamon I have had, are exquisitely delicious.

[pnwmom]

108. Quite the opposite. You couldn't be more wrong.

The French constitution PREVENTS any Church from becoming the inquisition. It is an anti-clerical, pro-secular Constitution unlike ours. All religion is kept separate and apart from the public sphere.

It was written in reaction to travesties like the Inquisition. It puts up a firm wall between Church and State.

[hifiguy]

165. And for that the French deserve

an extraordinarily hearty round of applause.

[Comrade Grumpy]

31. Real asshole move by those schools. In towns run by "rightwing mayors."

And it's getting a lot of support from Islamophobes right here on this thread. Maybe y'all can get off those keyboards and go protest at a mosque this weekend or something.

This is just a way to slap French Muslims in the face, and its being done by people we would excoriate for basically being the French version of xenophobic Tea Partiers.

[closeupready]

37. +1. Thanks.

You put that well.

[Darb]

49. I am going to disagree. I could see accomodating vegetarians in some fashion,

but not religious superstition or whatever it is that says they cannot eat pork. I see it as a cost measure more than anything. Just skip the pork and eat the vegetables, or as I said above, the vegetarian dish.

[pediatricmedic]

130. Disagree, they are standing up against the right wingers and other religious fundies

Haven't we had enough of some religious asshole telling us what we can or can't do. What we can eat, what women can do with their own bodies, etc.

Muslims, Catholics, or any other religion can practice what they want in their own homes. The french like most of the US believe in separation of church and state. The public schools are a part of the state and must abide by the rules or laws of the state. Accommodating a religion is not abiding by that separation. If the parents don't like it, they can home school, private school, or send a lunch with their kid.

Islam stands for everything that a liberal or progressive stands against. Not wanting to accommodate or pointing out the problems does not make one an Islamaphobe. While it is good to respect other views, we don't have to accommodate or accept them.

[Marr]

38. This may be unpopular here, but I think this is a sound position.

The Charlie Hebdo attacks alone should demonstrate there's a very real problem with religious intolerance in Europe-- coming *from* Islamic immigrants. I've seen video of local women being harassed quite aggressively by muslim men for not wearing scarves and such when they walk through what the men consider to be 'Islamic neighborhoods', for instance.

If there's any instance where I think a 'zero tolerance' policy is worthwhile, it's religion intermingling with public policy. This school lunch thing may seem petty, and it's no doubt being used as a soapbox for political opportunists, but I think it's a pretty good idea to say 'not one inch' when it comes to religious values dictating policy.

[yellowcanine]

52. So because some "Muslim men" are intolerant ok to take it out on Muslim children?

The one correct thing you said was "This school lunch thing may seem petty." Go with that.

[Marr]

62. No, because there seems to be considerable misunderstanding about the place of religious values

Last edited Wed Oct 14, 2015, 11:26 PM - Edit history (1)

in public policy, and just how much accommodation the faithful can expect for their particular values.

If I recall the numbers I read recently, 27% of British Muslims said they could sympathize with the Charlie Hebdo killers, for instance. That is, that they could understand why someone would want to murder a cartoonist for drawing a picture. That's shows a pretty broad and wild disconnect from a fundamental modern, western ideal of free speech. Imagine expecting that level of deference to your faith-- people cannot even draw pictures you don't like.

Now, lunch plans are, it seems to me personally, a benign example of religious consideration-- but again, if you're going to have a zero tolerance policy anywhere, this is the place I could see it being reasonable. You either want to keep these things utterly separated or you do not.

[yellowcanine]

68. There is a difference between IMPOSING religious values and ACCOMMODATING them.

And frankly, for someone to say, "My religion (or lack thereof) allows me to eat pork and therefore you should eat it also or go without" to a child who really does not have a lot of choice in the matter is imposing religious values, which is wrong. Again, what are you really teaching that child? I would say, religious intolerance. Do you really want to do that?

[Aerows]

162. As usual, Marr

You get it.

If someone's religion is killing people for drawing pictures of religious figures, that's not acceptable in many nations. It's not acceptable to the West to force women to stay at home and never go out in public without a full body covering.

If you *want* to live in a society that ascribes to those practices, move. You can't just take over a society that has it's own identity and force it to become like yours.

That's oppression. Why does no one ask the question of "Why should the values of the majority be forced to conform to the minority"?

If it offends you so deeply that every single cultural thing isn't religious enough to your liking, then what are you doing here? Why aren't you "suffering" with dignity in your smug notion that your religion is superior?

[hifiguy]

168. Outstanding post, Aerows.

An immigrant from, I dunno, say Thailand, to the US, Canada or Western Europe doesn't expect to be able to translate the entirety of their home nation's culture to their new residence. Many Muslims want to do just that, including 'cultural norms' that are ery far indeed from secular or egalitarian. And it is absurd to say that immigrants who are in a new country only because of the generosity of the host country, have any right to think they should be able to immigrate without assimilating the basic cultural norms of their host country much less replace the host country's cultural norms with their own.

I've lived in Minneapolis all my life. The Twin Cities had a very large wave of Vietnamese/Cambodian immigrants in the 1970s and early 1980s. They assimilated without a hiccup, though Grandpa and Grandpa may still speak the language of the old country and traditional holidays are still celebrated (the Norwegians and Swedes who have been here for 125 years do exactly the same thing), those who were born here and embraced American culture - all of them for every practical purpose - are as American as Beaver Cleaver or Theo Huxtable. I do not see that happening with the Somali immigrants, who seem very much to recreate their culture here in toto, right down to hijabs and women sitting at separate tables in this very Starbucks, with as little assimilation as possible.

When in Rome do as the Romans do is ancient and excellent advice.

[Aerows]

170. They came here because they saw it as a benefit to their lives.

Trying to recreate the very same environment that they fled from in a new place seems very much like "Where ever I go, there I am".

[hifiguy]

171. Yep.

I should have included our large population of Latino immigrants here with the Vietnamese. Every word of what I said about the SE Asian immigrants also applies to the Latinos.

And they brought such wonderful food with them!

[Aerows]

174. No kidding!

We are enriched by the culture they brought with them, not stifled by restrictions that tell us we have to be like them, "or else".

[pnwmom]

106. No. Because France has a sturdy wall between the state and religion -- ANY religion.

Even though the majority of the French were Catholics, they didn't want religion in their schools or their government or any other public places. Their constitution was written to strictly keep religion out of public areas. So this is keeping the same wall intact that applies to any religion.

[MADem]

114. I have to agree with you, for the reasons you have stated.

Practice your religion on your own time, and more power to you. Expecting states to know all the rules, dietary and otherwise, of differing faiths is just too much to expect. If you don't like the food, bring your own lunch.

[Aerows]

172. If every institution in every country

were to cater to the needs of every single person, that takes free choice out of the hands of the people.

I'm glad I can choose to eat something or to not eat it. The last thing I want is for the government to tell me I can't eat something because someone from somewhere else doesn't find it to their liking.

I guess I have a very difficult time with this notion because I was raised to believe that when you are a guest in someone's home, you eat what you are served and praise your host.

After all, they took the time to provide it for you.

[LittleBlue]

45. France is intolerant of Muslims

Not content with throwing veiled women in police vans, French society has chosen Muslim children as their next victims. Making them eat pork is probably the highlight of their day.

Cowardly French.

[Darb]

50. Disagree.

Being against accommodating superstition is not just a French thing and it is not cowardly in any sense.

[LittleBlue]

55. Isn't that just religious intolerance cloaked as secularism?

This is why France can't integrate its religious minorities.

Religious intolerance isn't my thing. Making reasonable accommodations for all religions is the secular path here.

[frizzled]

127. Ultimately, religion needs to go away - we shouldn't be tolerant of intolerance

If Islam were a sect of Christianity, we'd have no trouble recognizing and calling out how problematic it was, and working to secularize Muslims rather than "accommodating" their fundamentalist demands.

[spinbaby]

75. France is intolerant of picky eaters

And see no reason to accommodate gluten-free, low-carb, vegetarian, or any of the myriad of food intolerances so prevalent in the States. The pork thing is both about secularism and a general attitude that it's impolite to refuse food unless it's actually going to kill you.

[yellowcanine]

86. And VERY tolerant of their pork industry I suspect.

Which I am guessing is part of what is going on - a school lunch contract must be a nice fat payday.

[spinbaby]

131. I'm not sure they have a pork industry

They have pig farmers. France is somewhat like Whole Foods in that they're very concerned in where their food comes from and it tends to cost a fortune.

[yellowcanine]

134. They sure do and it is in crisis.

http://www.momagri.org/UK/a-look-at-the-news/French-pork-industry-The-crisis-drags-on_1576.html

[spinbaby]

140. Looks like foreign competition is the issue

The French pig farmers are under pressure from pork imports.

[yellowcanine]

142. In a world market it always is.

Probably one reason they are looking to serve pork in schools. It is likely easier to protect that market from foreign competition and also get a better price.

[KamaAina]

51. They could always come over here and get sent to Federal prison

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027250328

[KamaAina]

53. I didn't realize the French were that much into pork

Hmmmmm....

[MADem]

95. Italians and Spanish like it, too. As do Germans. And English. And Irish.

It is popular all over Europe, in fact.

[KamaAina]

96. Well, Germans and Irish, yeah, I knew that.

And of course Spain has jamon iberico. But I can't recall any French pork dishes offhand.

[riderinthestorm]

103. Quiche Lorraine, Tourtierre (meat pies), Croques Monsier or Madame

Flammekeuche, Cassoulet...

That's just off the top of my head since I'm not a big pork eater.

[KamaAina]

104. Ah yes, croque-monsieur.

Don't do quiche (I'm a real man ), and I thought tourtiere was a Quebecois dish.

[hifiguy]

167. I saw sanglier (wild boar)

on restaurant menus in both Paris and Lyon, as well as dishes with "regular" pork.

Cassoulet, saucissons of all kinds, the French lurve their pork. Yum.

[MADem]

105. It's a popular item on restaurant menus.

http://www.food.com/recipe/pork-aux-champignons-french-pork-with-mushrooms-256004

http://www.food.com/recipe/paupiettes-de-porc-french-stuffed-pork-fillet-parcels-288321

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_dishes

Choucroute garnie (sauerkraut with sausages, salt pork and potatoes)

Rillettes (spreadable paste made from braised pork and rendered fat, similar to pâté)

Tartiflette (a Savoyard gratin with potatoes, Reblochon cheese, cream and pork)

Andouillette (a kind of Sausage with Tripe)

Baeckeoffe.... etc.

It is tucked into a load of dishes, even when the dish is not advertised as ****pork!****

[closeupready]

102. Meat of any kind is really popular there.

Two kinds of meat I tried there as a virgin - and never want to sample ever again - were horse and boar.

I did also discover there that I enjoy Roquefort, morel mushrooms, snails, haricot verts, and white wine. Oh, and olives. And blood sausage (which is seasoned pork blood sausage (boudin noir), IIRC). Getting hungry here just remembering all the good stuff I used to eat, lol.

More pork are things like saucisson sec ... oh, and lard is the traditional cooking fat used in the northern half of the country.

Anyway, probably much more than you wanted to learn today (and yes, there will be a test)...

[hifiguy]

166. Free-roaming pigs are highly efficient meat-producers.

Most cultures have recognized this and have kept pigs. You don't need nasty factory farms. Pigs are extraordinarily good at taking care of themselves, in terms of finding things to eat.

[Blue_In_AK]

92. self delete

[Kang Colby]

107. Some of the posts are bewildering.

If an American school district refused to cater to the whims of Catholics, you'd see analysis and praise for maintaining separation of church and state. However, if the controversy is related to Islam, you somehow find more compassion and support for the religious amongst progressives.

[pnwmom]

109. Exactly. And France has a Constitution that has a much more solid wall between

Church and State.

They don't support any religious intrusion into the public sphere, whether Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or any other religion.

[MADem]

113. OWCH!!!!!!! THREAD WIN!!!!!!!

Pity there wasn't a way to put a blinking, horn blaring yellow box with sparkles all around your post, because that is the stone-cold truth.

People love to accommodate the exotic. When the exotic becomes the pedestrian, though, the attitudes often change.

[Kang Colby]

116. Thanks.

My theory is that it's simply elitism masquerading as multiculturalism. I agree with your statement about people loving to accommodate the exotic. There is nothing wrong with celebrating diversity, but we shouldn't celebrate aspects of cultural diversity that do not align with our core principals and values. Separation of church and state is clearly one of those values.

[frizzled]

126. It's genuinely nice to hear from principled liberals who don't have double standards for religions

nt

[Marr]

135. This is something that confuses the hell out of me as well.

Modern, western liberalism is thrown into a tailspin by Islam on so many issues, and it is just bewildering, as you said.

The same people who would laugh with glee at this same dynamic with US fundamentalists will shout 'bigotry' when you change the religion to Islam. People whose entire political identity is about feminism, or gay rights, or secularism anxiously defend the most misogynist, anti-gay, theocratic groups on the planet-- and intimate that you're the right-wing jerk if you point it out.

I just can't figure it out. Is it because so many western liberals instinctively defend minorities, and they view Islam as just another minority?

[snooper2]

147. Some on the far left hate anything "West", so be it politics, putin, or poor fundies in Syria

They will always take the side that is deemed "anti-west"

[Marr]

163. I do think that's an element of it.

But it can't possibly explain the whole thing. I mean, this kneejerk defensiveness is really widespread on the left. Like Ben Affleck on Bill Maher's show some time back-- that was one of the most high profile examples I can think of. He went absolutely apeshit about a discussion Maher was having with his guest on the topic of Islam. The guest was a prominent critic of religion generally, but he had a lot to say about Islam in particular, since it is at present more oppressive and aggressively fundamentalist, generally speaking, than any other mainstream religion.

But they couldn't even have the discussion. Affleck just kept accusing the man of being a 'racist', which was bizarre, since Islam isn't a race. He could not break out of that line of thinking. In a way, it seems like much of the left is still looking at the world through a 60's Civil Rights Era lense, and it makes them very easy to manipulate sometimes.

[redgreenandblue]

111. They should make it "eat dog meat or go hungry".

And see how long it takes until the policy is dropped.

It is easy to dismiss this when it isn't *your* customs that are being violated. Who decided that pork should be the default?

Good example of instituionalized bigotry actually.

[riderinthestorm]

119. If dog meat were a common part of the French diet, that would be one thing

but it's not.

Pork is.

It's crazy to expect public schools to try to work around every dietary restriction, especially religious ones. We would be arguing about the separation of church and state if schools here refused to serve meat on Friday for Catholics for example.

And it's Muslims who are putting up a fuss about pork. Not secular France.

France has a very different constitution than the US, especially when it comes to religion in their public places. They rigidly adhere to secularism since their own revolution in the 1700s. It's why the burqa ban is so popular there, and has been upheld by the EU courts. Their society isn't the same as ours at all when it comes to religion .

[redgreenandblue]

154. Again, who gets to define what the norm is?

When you say "a common part of the French diet", which French people are you referring to? All French people or just the white ones?

I grew up in Germany. Some people would argue that "Sauerkraut" a common part of our diet. I personally like it, but if someone told me that this is what I have to eat because "culture" I'd tell them to shove it. When one group gets to define their preferences as the norm then this is institutionalized discrimination.

[riderinthestorm]

155. You've got it exactly backward.

The analogy would be that a religious group is demanding that no German child be served sauerkraut, because that religion's holy book demanded it.

I presume many German parents would find that a bit whack.

France finds that even more whack, especially since they have institutionalized secularism in their Constitution.

So who defines the "norm"?

1. French law
2. Those tasked with enforcing the law like police, and yes, even public school teachers and administrators.
3. French society itself which is fiercely secular. They don't have to accomodate every cultural and religious whim. That's why societies ban things like FGM. That's why France has banned burqas. Why French schoolchildren and personnel can't wear any religious identifiers at school like headscarves, crosses or yamulkes.

So the rationale for not caving into a demand to banish all pork items from the menu has a long history that's bolstered by their laws and culture.

Pork on the menu will mean a bagged lunch from home and that's not a big deal, not here or anywhere imo.

[Fumesucker]

133. Muslims wouldn't eat dog either

Dogs are also considered haram.

In fact that causes some conflicts with Muslim taxi drivers and potential fares who need to transport their dog.

[redgreenandblue]

112. How is pork the "secular" choice?

Ridiculous.

[MADem]

128. It is a staple meat in French cuisine. It is not "ridiculous" if you understand anything about the

culture.

Haven't you heard of the French Paradox? They eat a lot of pork, they cook in lard.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_paradox

Renaud's observations regarding the apparent disconnect between French patterns of high saturated fat consumption and their low rates of cardiovascular disease can be quantified using data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.[5] In 2002, the average French person consumed 108 grams per day of fat from animal sources, while the average American consumed only 72 grams. The French eat four times as much butter, 60 percent more cheese and nearly three times as much pork. Although the French consume only slightly more total fat (171 g/d vs 157 g/d), they consume much more saturated fat because Americans consume a much larger proportion of fat in the form of vegetable oil, with most of that being soybean oil.[6] However, according to data from the British Heart Foundation,[7] in 1999, rates of death from coronary heart disease among males aged 35–74 years were 115 per 100,000 people in the U.S. but only 83 per 100,000 in France.

[redgreenandblue]

153. So who gets to define what "French culture" means?

All French people or just the white ones?

I grew up in Germany, and if someone told me I need to eat Weisswurst every day because it is "our culture" I'd tell them to stick it were the sun don't shine. If it had happened during my high-school days someone would probably drew a swastika on the principle's car in response.

[MADem]

164. You probably don't understand that this concept was operative during the French colonial years.

Asssimilation was prized, the nail that stuck up got hammered down. The colonials who did best under French rule were those who adapted to the French way of life. The children in colonial schools spoke French, were taught in French, learned French history, culture, read French literature, and were educated in an entirely French fashion. The French way of life is all about history, literature, style, food, wine, a certain pace of life, and certain customs and courtesies that matter to the society at large. It's not about skin color--there are French people who came from Morocco, Chad or Algeria around the time those countries achieved independence who opted to stay French, and who are as French as Charles DeGaulle in their attitudes and lifestyles.

Now, you can scream at me all day, and "blame" me for telling you this, but this is the way it is. And thus far, European courts are ruling FOR national traditions and cultures.

No one WOULD tell you to eat weisswurst every day in Germany. If they served food you didn't like in school, you could bring a sack lunch.

No one is telling these kids (or the Jewish kids) to eat the pork (or telling the Hindu kids to eat the beef) either. What they are saying is that they're going back to doing things in the traditional French way, and if you don't like it, plan ahead or fill up on sides. The French take great pride in their classic cuisine and wines...all you have to do is look at how they treated Julia Child when she tried to break into the club to see how protective they are of their standards in this area.

Americans are very spoiled in that they are used to having choices--and in some cases, too many choices. Like Senator Sanders said, how many different deodorants do people need? When I went to school (in America) they mimeographed a menu and sent it home with the children, and in some cases it would be printed in the local newspaper. There were no "options" on the menu. It was the salisbury steak with watery mashed potato and carrots, or nothing. Or the turkey and stuffing with succotash. Oh, boy-pudding for dessert! Chocolate, too! Life was perfect. When I went to school abroad, you ate what they gave you, even if it was tripe soup and bread and chocolate, or you waited until you got home. There was no "choice" and it was all in together.

Nobody died. Nobody starved, either.

I do think, as someone else pointed out, that there is a tendency for people who pretend to be liberal to bend over backwards to fuss and be "tolerant" of exotic faiths, when if some Kim Davis fundy Christian church demanded special accommodations (We need a room to pray in! We need special foods as a function of our faith!) they'd be told to pound sand and that old "separation of church and state" canard (which is a weak reality here in USA) would be applied. In France, though, it is not a weak reality--it's a bulletproof, bomb-proof wall.

I am a person who is at home in mosque, temple and most churches--I can blend in perfectly and know enough of the prayers and customs to "pass" in most major faiths--but I am a fervent advocate of the church-state separation along the lines of the French model. I am not stupid, and I do realize that the far right is doing this to "make a point," but as I have said, this attitude has currency even among the French lefties--they are proud of their culture and traditions, and they welcome people, but their attitude is "You want to join our club? You play by OUR rules."

I am also a person who thinks that cultures, customs and traditions do matter--they define a national identity. It would be the opposite of lovely if Rome became indistinguishable from London, if Paris was no different from Madrid.

In America, we have less understanding or appreciation of this because we steal unabashedly from every culture, and our "culture" is "We Want it ALL" -- but living in a homogenous society brings a different perspective.

[pnwmom]

138. Just like bacon and eggs is a secular choice in the U.S.

It has no religious association for the people eating it; only for the people whose religion prohibits eating it.

[redgreenandblue]

152. Maybe I prefer pancakes over bacon and eggs.

Again, who gets to define what is "secular"? I don't see bacon and eggs as secular by any stretch.

In this case "secular" is defined as "in accordance with the preferences of one group", which is an example of institutionalized discrimination. It is the same as defining straight marriage as the "norm" and gay marriage as the exception.

[Recursion]

146. Because "secular" is not "neutral" in France

Secular means anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim and anti-Catholic.

[frizzled]

124. "Assimilate, or get out" is consistent with a secular, liberal republic.

Tolerance, multiculturalism and secularism may not be compatible.

[Act_of_Reparation]

136. No, it isn't.

And secularism is not incompatible with tolerance or multiculturalism. There are reasonable limits to any right, and no society on the face of the planet could possibly accommodate both the public good and the particulars of everyone's faith.

What we're seeing in France is not a symptom of secularism, but of a right-wing, but of a nationalistic response to an influx of immigrants. The demographics of France are changing, and conservatives are predictably resistant. They're couching their xenophobia in flag-waving, patriotic nonsense, and it is just as transparent over there as it is over here.

[pnwmom]

139. France has a long history of a very high, strong wall between Church and State.

A wall that was put up by their Constitution, which means as much to them as our Constitution does to us. They had seen the excesses wrought by mixing Church and State and decided to put an end to them.

The French treatment of Muslims is consistent with their treatment of Catholics, Protestants, and Jews.

[Snobblevitch]

132. What I find interesting about this story is about my school cafeteria.

We were never served roast pork. The only pork we had were either in the hotdogs or the tiny diced ham in the scalloped potatoes. The reason I find it interesting is that my hometown is located in the congressional district that produces the fourth most hogs in the nation.

[Yorktown]

137. How about banning beef because of Hindus? Or all meat because of vegans?

I am personally a vegetarian.

I must say I am puzzled at why schools should cater to the whims of one/any religion?

Kids can bring a lunch box on days the menu doesn't suit them.

[tblue37]

143. This is deliberate religious bigotry, and it is aimed at schoolchildren ffs!

Using kids as targets for such bigotry is especially nasty. What about kids with dietary restriictions for other reasons--like vegetarians? (Of course, some--like Hindus--are vegetarians for religious reasons.)

[MosheFeingold]

149. I'm Jewish

We kept kosher. My mom packed our lunches every day and we did not expect special meals.

I don't see the big deal.

[Freddie Stubbs]

150. If you don't like the school lunch, pack your own

[cherokeeprogressive]

176. Problem solved. You read my mind. nt

[Humanist_Activist]

159. My problem is them framing this as a national identity thing....

As if saying French Muslims or Jews are less French than the rest because they don't eat pork. That sounds extremely bigoted.

[Aerows]

160. Cultural Identity is a compelling thing

I grew up in New Orleans. You know where you are from when you grow up in a city with such strong cultural influence (which, is of course, French influenced among MANY OTHERS).

I knew what was going to be on the menu on both Mondays and Fridays. Monday was red beans and rice day, Friday was fish day. Nobody batted an eyelash, because, hell, that was just what everybody ate (and still does). It's tradition.

[Bad Thoughts]

169. How sad that so many DUers are supporting France's religious right in warping laïcité ...

... in order to exclude kids from school lunches.

Even the rabidly anticlerical Jules Ferry felt that the primary goal of the French system of public education was to bring all Frenchmen together to share the same experiences, not divide them up.

According to French law, schools must be able to provide a varied menu of equal nutritional value. The menu de substitution is something that is normally always in effect. The suppression thereof on days when pork is the main dish is simply meant to embarrass Muslims. It is grandstanding by those who support Sarkozy's Christian identity politics. It is creating the very divisions that Ferry intended to combat, to bring religious people into the strongly secular state rather than oppose it.

[hifiguy]

173. The French do not have a "religous right"

in anything like the US sense. Their Constitution makes such a thing impossible.

[Bad Thoughts]

175. The constitution does not outlaw clerical parties

The UMP is technically republican (not in the American sense), but Sarkozy has been pushing a Christian identity since 2007.

[Aerows]

177. If you want to live in a society that forces women

to cover themselves from head to toe, disallows pork, kills people for drawing cartoons, it is probably best if you pack your shit and go to a place that favors such opinions, actions and identity.

It's called freedom. You can either stay and accept the rules of the society you are in, or you are free to go back where things are more to your liking. You left there for a reason, don't bring those reasons everywhere else and wonder why it isn't to everyone's liking.

[Bad Thoughts]

187. What does this have to do with me?

I am presenting the reality of French political culture, in which certain right wing (and George W. Bush inspired ) politicians have picked up on the calls of pur porc by the National Front of France in an effort to reclaim what they say in a nation rooted in Christian (not Enlightenment) civilization.

Since the 1880s, the public schools of France were designed to be a beacon of integration and secularization by drawing them away from religious institutions. It was more important to make them one nation that sat together in the same class, saluted the same flag, and received the same education without the interference of the clergy. At the root of education policy was the promotion of a common sense of Frenchness that would overwhelm and, perhaps, replace any other identities and affiliations the individual might have. The regulations concerning school meals, as legislated in the 1970s and updated in the 1990s, followed in the same spirit. It provided to students a rich and varied meal that the government felt that every Frenchman deserved, even children: two hours, five full courses, with choices, that were better than the lunches they could get at home and at a cheaper price. It was designed to inspire students to feel an essential part of French culture in commune with one another, and at the same time, convince their parents to let them take their lunches at school (not bring them home for any reason, let alone religious reasons). The fact that there would be choices was important because on the one hand, it was considered part of the experience of French cuisine, and on the other, to undermine the desire of religious parents to remove their children. And the government only went part of the way: it offered alternatives to pork; it did not offer kosher or hallal meals.

Those are the facts. I am sorry if France does not live up to your expectations of a secular state.

[hifiguy]

180. That is unfortunate.

The secularism of France is one of its gifts to humanity.

Fortunately clerical parties seem to be a thing of the past.

[Aerows]

186. Thank you.

You expressed my thoughts more succinctly than I could have.