While the title of this post might read like fiction, it's really non-fiction and is likely to come to many of the nation's food stores in the New Year 2016.
Yes, it's true: Muslim refugees from Somalia living in Minnesota are holding protests and demanding that the State change its food stamp policies to require low-price, healthy-choice, halal compliant food shelves--free of any pork product--that is acceptable under Sharia Law.
Don't believe The Motley Monk? Watch the video, care of CBSLocal:
Yes, it's true: Muslim refugees from Somalia living in Minnesota are holding protests and demanding that the State change its food stamp policies to require low-price, healthy-choice, halal compliant food shelves--free of any pork product--that is acceptable under Sharia Law.
Don't believe The Motley Monk? Watch the video, care of CBSLocal:
The cost to taxpayers? An estimated $150k+.
While some are legitimately upset that the government would be required to pay more for the Muslim refugees to have halal shelves, there is a more fundamental question at stake here: Would doing so not require the government to subsidize religion? For example, does the government provide Jews living in poverty and receiving food stamps special "kosher" shelves? No.
But that doesn't matter to Imam Hassan Mohamud, who said:
While some are legitimately upset that the government would be required to pay more for the Muslim refugees to have halal shelves, there is a more fundamental question at stake here: Would doing so not require the government to subsidize religion? For example, does the government provide Jews living in poverty and receiving food stamps special "kosher" shelves? No.
But that doesn't matter to Imam Hassan Mohamud, who said:
It’s about human rights also, basic human rights to get the proper food and also healthy food.
Yep, there it is again: Another basic, human right: Food that fits religious dietary restrictions. Perhaps that's the way it is in Somalia and the way the United Nations wants it, but is that the way it should be in the United States? The issue is not one of providing assistance to those in need. That's already being done. It's about what kind of assistance the goverment should be provide, meaning "that taxpayers subsidize."
In the free market, where there is a "need"--not a "right"--there is always a solution. Why don't some enterprising Muslim entrepreneurs--or enterprising non-Muslim entrepreneurs--seize upon this need due to religious dietary restrictions to open a new market, namely, Sharia-compliant food stores, where the Muslim refugees can redeem their food stamps by purchasing products with the halal stamp of approval? After all, The Motley Monk regularly shops at the local Mexican, Indian, and Philippino markets for unique and authentic ingredients from those cultures. He doesn't arrange for a protest and demand of the County Commissioners that they order those items be sold at the local Giant's food store.
In the United States, why must the government subsidize and cater to religious beliefs, thus choosing one religion over another? That seems to be unconstitutional.
So, where's the outrage on the part of the ACLU? And, what ever happened to that "strict" wall of separation?
It must only count for Christians and Jews.
That is a problem and, it seems, will become a bigger problem as the New Year 2016 unfolds and the United States generously accepts more and more Muslim refugees.
Let the discussion begin...
To read the CBSLocal.com story, click on the following link:
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/09/15/somali-group-pushes-for-non-pork-food-shelf/
In the free market, where there is a "need"--not a "right"--there is always a solution. Why don't some enterprising Muslim entrepreneurs--or enterprising non-Muslim entrepreneurs--seize upon this need due to religious dietary restrictions to open a new market, namely, Sharia-compliant food stores, where the Muslim refugees can redeem their food stamps by purchasing products with the halal stamp of approval? After all, The Motley Monk regularly shops at the local Mexican, Indian, and Philippino markets for unique and authentic ingredients from those cultures. He doesn't arrange for a protest and demand of the County Commissioners that they order those items be sold at the local Giant's food store.
In the United States, why must the government subsidize and cater to religious beliefs, thus choosing one religion over another? That seems to be unconstitutional.
So, where's the outrage on the part of the ACLU? And, what ever happened to that "strict" wall of separation?
It must only count for Christians and Jews.
That is a problem and, it seems, will become a bigger problem as the New Year 2016 unfolds and the United States generously accepts more and more Muslim refugees.
Let the discussion begin...
To read the CBSLocal.com story, click on the following link:
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/09/15/somali-group-pushes-for-non-pork-food-shelf/
RSS Feed
