Danish city makes pork mandatory in public institutions

[Angst]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-nation/?postshare=2631453314594895&tid=ss_tw

In Denmark, a country with more pigs than humans, pork has become the latest element of a debate that has been declared a culture war.

Earlier this week, the city council of Randers made it mandatory for public institutions, including cafeterias in kindergartens and daycare centers, to have pork dishes on their menus. The council members said that their decision was an effort to preserve Danish identity and culture -- including pork meals which are consumed by most Danes.

Pork is often on the menu at these kinds of cafeterias, which is why critics are calling the decision a farce intended to fuel anti-Muslim and anti-foreigner tensions. A few efforts to ban it have provoked debates in the past, including an incident in 2013 when then-Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt criticized day cares that had stopped serving meals that included pork. But according to Agence France-Presse, only 30 out of more than 1,700 day cares were affected.

Pork — which is usually not consumed by observant Jews and Muslims — is central to the Danish food industry. On its website, the Danish Agriculture and Food Council states that the consumption and export of pork are crucial to Denmark's economy. There are about 5,000 pig farms in the country, with several million animals. "Exports of pig meat account for almost half of all agricultural exports," the council wrote.

The decision is likely to please anti-Islamic lobby groups. Although the council stressed that it did not want to force Muslims or Jews to eat food that contradicts with their religious beliefs, some considered the decision a message to refugees and other migrants that Denmark was unwilling to give up parts of its culture to accommodate others.

On Facebook, anti-Islam politician Martin Henriksen welcomed the city council's decision. "It should be needless to say ... that it is unacceptable to ban Danish food culture, including dishes with pork," he wrote. "What's next?! The Danish People’s Party works nationally and locally for Danish culture ... and hence, we are also opposed to Islamic rules ... which dictate what Danish children should eat.”

The British Independent newspaper quoted Manu Sareen, a former integration minister, as criticizing the council's decision as an effort "to impose a forced ideology … in this case on children."

Denmark has become one of Europe's most restrictive countries in terms of dealing with the influx of refugees. Last week, the Danish government secured a parliamentary majority for an immigration bill that would also allow police officers to seize cash and valuables from refugees. The proposal has provoked outrage internationally. Switzerland passed a similar law years ago. (*)

The U.N. refugee agency warned that Denmark's bill "could fuel fear, xenophobia and similar restrictions that would reduce — rather than expand — the asylum space globally and put refugees in need at life-threatening risks." Among other measures, the law increases requirements for refugees to stay in the country for an extended time.

Even before the bill was proposed, few refugees picked Denmark for their final destination. Out of more than 1 million refugees who arrived in the 28 members states of the European Union last year, only 13,000 applied for asylum in Denmark.

Basically pork has to be available in public institutions in Randers, the city in question. This does not mean that Jews and Muslims have to eat pork (because the law allows institutions to provide alternatives, even if it doesn't force them to). The policy is implemented because many Danish institutions have removed pork from the menu lately, because the increasing number of Muslims made serving pork impractical and bothersome from an administrative standpoint.

I personally don't support this law. If I look over the fact that the policy is intended to preserve some sort of cultural heritage (which is respectable, but in the instance of sausages, it's really a quite silly cultural value), the kind of pork that is cheap enough for institutions is of poor quality and more often than not have traces of industrial medicine (among others, antibiotika) that increases germs' resistance against these drugs, as well as having a slew of other unhealthy side effects. Also, it's a policy that limits the economic and administrative freedoms and capacities of the institutions in question (Having to buy something without any direct benefit is a possible waste of work and money), even if ever so slightly.

Importantly, this law wasn't pressured from the parents of kids in these institutions. This law is ideologically enforced from the top down without any parents getting involved.

(*) Also I despise the thought of Danish police forcibly ceasing jewelry or cash from migrants. Imagine traveling with your grandmother's ring to have it taken by the Danish state.

 

[Leoreth]

If being very specific about the kind of animal you eat is what you consider an essential aspect of your culture ...

 

[Kyriakos]

 

[luiz]

It's a silly law. Of course I don't think schools should be forced to serve substitution meals to students, as they are in some French departments either. If your crazy religion doesn't allow you to eat something that is common in the country you live in, then cook at home and give it to your kids. The taxpayers should not have to spend 1 cent to accommodate your religious idiocy.

But specifically forcing schools to serve pork is going to the other extreme. Let them serve whatever they have always been serving...

 

[Silurian]

It's a silly law. Of course I don't think schools should be forced to serve substitution meals to students, as they are in some French departments either. If your crazy religion doesn't allow you to eat something that is common in the country you live in, then cook at home and give it to your kids. The taxpayers should not have to spend 1 cent to accommodate your religious idiocy.

But specifically forcing schools to serve pork is going to the other extreme. Let them serve whatever they have always been serving...

So no vegetarian food then.

 

[Joecoolyo]

If you're majority culture is so weak as to need government laws to enforce it's integrity, maybe it isn't worth enforcing in the first place?

 

[Lillefix]

Sounds a bit silly. Very silly. Actually just as silly as not eating pork because of some religious conviction.

 

[luiz]

So no vegetarian food then.

Fine by me.

And forcing vegetarianism on kids is pretty morally questionable anyway. Meals at public schools should be balanced, and that includes meat.

 

[EgonSpengler]

The policy is implemented because many Danish institutions have removed pork from the menu lately, because the increasing number of Muslims made serving pork impractical and bothersome from an administrative standpoint.

So it sounds like this wasn't a reaction to some concerted effort by Muslims. It sounds like people just don't eat much pork anymore. I don't eat much pork. Would I be considered a threat to Danish culture, if I were to move to Randers? Me with my fair skin, blue eyes and Christian heritage?

 

[LucyDuke]

What a desperate pathetic waste of food and money.

Fine by me.

And forcing vegetarianism on kids is pretty morally questionable anyway. Meals at public schools should be balanced, and that includes meat.

Vegetarianism is an awful lot healthier than a lot of religion is.

 

[luiz]

Vegetarianism is an awful lot healthier than a lot of religion is.

I don't deny it. But specially for kids, unless it is very carefully planned and followed by a professional, it's also a bad idea. And veganism for kids is just immoral.

Basically, people who want to deviate from the standard culture's menu should cook at home. Be it because they want their kids to eat kosher, or halal, or vegetarian, or have sushi everyday. It's not the taxpayer's problem.

 

[Wastl]

So it sounds like this wasn't a reaction to some concerted effort by Muslims. It sounds like people just don't eat much pork anymore. I don't eat much pork. Would I be considered a threat to Danish culture, if I were to move to Randers? Me with my fair skin, blue eyes and Christian heritage?

No, that wasn't really the reason. It has nothing to do with Danes possibly eating less pork. As got stated above, some institutions simply found it too bothersome to take care of the different tastes and religious rules. They threw out pork because muslims couldn't eat it and they didn't want to deal with the effort needed to offer different meals.


There is also absolutely nothing wrong with taking cash or other valuables from refugees. Items that are of extreme emotional value to the person cannot be taken. Every Danish citizen that requires help from the state first needs to use his own savings before he can rely on the state. This law merely equals the playing-field, as the same is true for refugees now, meaning both Danes and refugees get treated the same way in terms of getting help from the state.

 

[luiz]

There is also absolutely nothing wrong with taking cash or other valuables from refugees. Items that are of extreme emotional value to the person cannot be taken. Every Danish citizen that requires help from the state first needs to use his own savings before he can rely on the state. This law merely equals the playing-field, as the same is true for refugees now, meaning both Danes and refugees get treated the same way in terms of getting help from the state.

Yeah when I first read about this law I also thought it was quite barbaric and discriminatory (that's how European media was portraying it), but once you look into the details there's nothing wrong with it.

They let refugees keep an allowance in cash (like 5,000 per person, if I'm not mistaken), all personal items and etc, and only take the excess to cover the refugees' own expenses.

 

[Angst]

I don't think it's that unreasonable for people jsut not wanting to eat pork and the institutions changing accordingly. There's really no need to eat pork, cheap pork is somewhat unhealthy and there are plenty of alternatives.

If being very specific about the kind of animal you eat is what you consider an essential aspect of your culture ...

Just so you know, I am not proud of pork eating being this important. I think in fact that it's ridiculous.

If you're majority culture is so weak as to need government laws to enforce it's integrity, maybe it isn't worth enforcing in the first place?

I'm not sure how integral pork eating is to our culture really. But you're probably right.

So it sounds like this wasn't a reaction to some concerted effort by Muslims. It sounds like people just don't eat much pork anymore. I don't eat much pork. Would I be considered a threat to Danish culture, if I were to move to Randers? Me with my fair skin, blue eyes and Christian heritage?

We do eat a lot of pork. But the point is that the institutions had just adapted to the new cultural climate and some people don't like that kids "only" get pork at home or whatever.

Where are you from? Slavs are sometimes talked bad about on a macro level (in the newspapers and such) but don't experience much racism in day-to-day interactions as their ethnicity is often found out after talking a bit first. (Yes, this is sad.)

I don't deny it. But specially for kids, unless it is very carefully planned and followed by a professional, it's also a bad idea. And veganism for kids is just immoral.

Actually most people eat more meat than they actually need. Somewhat limiting the amount of meat served isn't a bad idea.

 

[LucyDuke]

It doesn't take a professional to create a healthy vegetarian diet. It just takes some attention, which many many parents do not pay anyway. A child on a half-ass vegetarian diet is probably not worse off than a child on a diet of sugar and bologna.

I mostly agree that the only sushi-eating family in town is responsible for their own sushi. But if there's no keen interest in the pork at school (or whatever), it's not some kind of principled stance to take the pork off the menu, it's just practical. Pork is not necessary.

 

[LucyDuke]

Actually most people eat more meat than they actually need. Somewhat limiting the amount of meat served isn't a bad idea.

How likely is that, even? I'd be impressed if they decreased the meat served instead of just substituting chicken or something.

 

[Angst]

They let refugees keep an allowance in cash (like 5,000 per person, if I'm not mistaken), all personal items and etc, and only take the excess to cover the refugees' own expenses.

The problem is that 5000 kr per person keeps people in poverty because of the Danish cost of living. It's not abnormal for ordinary apartments to cost over 5000 kr a month, and there's a huge demand for housing in the cities to begin with (and there's a huge demand for work in the provinces, meaning that if they move to where there is housing, there's no work and they can't get out of the 5000/month poverty situation). For a long time, it was actually 5000 per family, too, and I'm not sure it moved away from that, and that is indeed not enough to go by. Producing poor families like this is especially impractical because they aren't integrated; we are producing a poor underclass that is of a different ethnicity (EDIT: Or of different ethnicities, rather.). You must understand that this is not a good idea.

The government based the 5000 rate on the rate that students get for studying in Denmark by the state, arguing that if Danish students can get by on it, refugees should too. The problem is that, firstly, students actually get closer to 5700 (which is crucial because of the housing prices), but also because it is difficult to get by on 5700 a month and students are allowed an addition of 2200 kr a month of student loans, almost rent-free too. Refugees are not offered this service. If they learn Danish, they earn an extra of 600 per month, however, but they still don't have the option of the cheap loans, so they will have a very difficult time and sometimes go into debt.

 

[Angst]

How likely is that, even? I'd be impressed if they decreased the meat served instead of just substituting chicken or something.

I'm a... flexitarian, I guess?... I mostly eat vegetarian food but eat meat sometimes.

I support that everyone should eat like this (especially in institutions) but acknowledge that most people would probably see it as hippie madness.

There's the carbon footprint too : (

 

[warpus]

I think a business should be able to sell whatever the hell they want, as long as it's legal.

There is one problem though, improperly labelled fake bacon. The closest pizza joint to me used to make amazing pizza. Then they were sold. I figured I should try the new owners out and see what they're all about, so I walked in one day, looked at the menu, and got a pepperoni & bacon pizza with some onions and mushrooms or something like that.

I take it home and bite in.. .. .. it was NOT bacon. It was turkey bacon, I think, lacking both the look of real bacon, and texture, and taste.

I look back at the pizza joint the next day (I pass it every day on my way home) and sure enough, in the corner of the menu, inside, you can see a "Halal" thingy. It's not advertised very well, it doesn't really stick out, unless you are looking for it specifically, or if you have time and are just standing there and looking around. I was on my phone the entire time I was waiting for the pizza, and no adveritsement anywhere, no sign, etc. informed me that this was a Muslim pizza joint that did not sell any bacon. All their fake bacon was labelled as "bacon", everywhere, I double-checked.

So I left them 0/5 reviews on all sites I could and have never gone back.

I don't give a crap if your stupid God tells you that you can't eat bacon, that's your own stupid problem and you are entitled to push bacon out of your life if you so wish. But don't sell me something that is not bacon in any sort of way AS bacon. That's BS.

I've seen other Muslim places doing this. I think they should be able to sell what they want, but label it properly. Not everyone remembers stupid religious rules when they're buying food, and most people when presented with the words "bacon" will assume it's pork.

I would guess they don't like labelling it as "turkey bacon" because it lowers their sales, but that's the only problem I have with Halal places - they need to label their products honestly.

I would also have a problem with it if it made it hard for me to find pork products. If the local grocery stores stopped carrying pork because there were enough Muslims in the area, and it just added overheads they'd rather avoid, then I'd start rioting. Sell what you want, but enough businesses in the area need to sell pork products, or else.

 

[Angst]

Bacon is overrated.

(ducks)