23 October, 2020

Blog

What’s At ‘Steak’ In Sri Lanka? The Hypocrisy Of ‘Beef Politics’!

By Mohamed Harees –

Lukman Harees

Hypocrisy in politics is a time-honoured tradition. The prevalence of deception may be the great irony of democratic politics. Accusations of hypocrisy are so common in politics that one usage of the term “politician” is as a near-synonym for “hypocrite”. As Cambridge Don David Runciman argues that we should accept hypocrisy as a fact of politics, but without resigning ourselves to it, let alone cynically embracing it. Hypocrisy is the lifeblood of politics. Hypocrisy is however not the particular vice of any one segment of the political spectrum. Be it as it may, politics has become, may be barring a few exceptional figures, one big, immoral con. Perhaps expectedly, we’re harder on hypocrites when they belong to the opposite group. Look at hypocrite from your own tribe, and the alternate explanations begin to creep in.

The cow is now again grazing the political pasture in Sri Lanka, with the present  government’s  proposed imposition of a ban of cattle slaughter . However political hypocrisy is telling! when the cow slaughtered within the borders of the Island, becomes a ‘mummy’ but when imported it’s considered ‘yummy’. What is religious about eating the meat of a calf slaughtered in another country confounds any bemused thinker? Most definitely the religious sentiments of the people about eating beef should be respected, but what is detestable is that there is political hypocrisy surrounding this contentious issue.

Cows are now not just animals; rather have evolved into political animals. They have become a tool of political parties, an electioneering code word and a rallying cry for the political opportunists, with nowadays beef featuring more in our political system than its cuisine. The cunning politicians and their backers among Maha Sangha and the extremist Right, have always found meat in the demand to ban beef. The obsession with beef is a leftover of the communal politics of the last century, when food was a marker of the religious divide and served as a pretext to mobilise communities.

There are lessons from our neighbourhood. Of all the social fault lines caused by cultural and religious sensitivities surrounding food in India, none cut deeper than beef and beef-eating. Cow slaughter is a disputable point in India in view of the cow’s religious status and regarded as a living being particularly in Hinduism. Ironically, in India the cow has become a polarising animal. The Indian cow grazed the political, cultural, and social landscape from time to time. Historically, it was a leading source of the country’s communal strife. Dalit and Muslim’s recent victimization in the name of the Gau Mata put the holy cow back into debate and discourse. Amid the framing of the Constitution, the subject of cow butcher was a standout amongst the most laden and argumentative themes of discussion. Seth Govind Das, an individual from the Constituent Assembly, confined it as a civilizational problem from the time of Lord Krishna and requested the ban on cow slaughter to be made on the Constitution’s part on major rights, on a standard with the restriction of untouchability.

Still, the “beef ban” is often pitted as a Hindu-versus-Muslim issue in India. Arguably it has a worrisome impact on the social and religious equilibrium of India’s hugely diverse and complex society. Beef traders and consumers have been frequently attacked, and lynched and even killed by Hindu vigilante cow protection groups over the last two years. India is however the world’s largest exporter of beef. Reports indicate that India exports beef worth $4 billion annually, and that the ban is already causing concern over a potential rise in global beef prices due to reduced supply, given that the country’s export volume. The Agricultural and Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA), India’s apex food export agency, says buffalo meat exports have been growing at an average of approximately 14 per cent every year since 2011. It says that in 2015, India earned more from beef exports than from the export of Basmati rice, so far the country’s top export item in the food category. 

Contrary to the perception of India in the western imagination as a predominantly vegetarian country, according to recent National Sample Survey data, more than 70% of Indians above the age of 15 are non-vegetarian. And while chicken is the most widely consumed meat, even classic beef items like burgers and steaks had become popular on menus in top restaurants across Indian cities in the last decade, where patrons include wealthy urban Hindus. A cocktail of religion, tradition and food habits is behind the political calculations over the meat debate on both sides of the aisle. Although such 70% of Indians eat meat, including a majority of Hindus, many upper-caste communities within the religion are vegetarian. They’re a minority, but centuries of cultural dominance give upper castes outsize political influence. By banning beef and curtailing other meat, the BJP hoped to ensure the support of these communities. Thus there is political sense to maintain a beef ban for the survival of the extremist BJP government in India. 

While proponents claim the ban protects traditional Hindu values, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, and Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan have vociferously opposed the ban because their states traditionally consume beef. Many Indian liberals  have questioned whether such a ban is constitutional, arguing that the policing of food choices infringes on the basic rights of citizens. However with the cattle slaughter becoming a politically contentious issue, many who don’t eat beef but were previously not concerned with others eating it, also became roused into taking a stronger, less tolerant stance than before. While those who simply ate beef to subsist, suddenly feel like they have a point to prove. And to think that a ban on cow slaughter will put an end to communalism in India is silly and ignores realities. Communalism will be stoked up by vested interests for getting votes, irrespective of a cow slaughter ban.

Back to Sri Lanka, although this ban has been postponed by a month, the decision has already been welcomed by the hierarchy of the Buddhist Chapters. It will certainly strike a resonance chord  with the Sinhala Buddhist lobby groups as well as animal rights groups. Few years back, Ven Indratissa committed suicide close to the Dalada Maligawa calling for a ban on cattle slaughter. Apart from political hypocrisy, there is also religious hypocrisy as well. There are also public protests against a blanket ban to this effect despite its medicinal benefits, that it is hypocritical to consider only ban on cattle slaughter when mass scale slaughter of other living beings like chicken, goat etc a(and even fish) are freely carried out. All are living beings and Buddhism preaches against all types of killing of praana(living beings) which should extend even to vegetation as well. The critics therefore cite Hindu influence in only singling out the cow for the ban. 

The Muslims, should not have any qualms in the religious sense with the cattle ban, although it would be in the economic sense. Some critics think that the intention of this governmental action is to target the Muslim beef traders economically. But then, quantitatively with most beef eaters as well as cattle breeders and suppliers being from the majority community, the economic impact would be felt all over; not just by the Muslim beef dealers. In fact, the ban order from the government would not only impact those who eat beef, but also will have a detrimental impact on the leather industry and the meat producers (who not only provide for the domestic market, but also for overseas markets). But then, as earlier stated, there is the tongue in cheek proposal to import beef to satisfy the millions of those who enjoy their steak and beef cuisine which goes beyond the Muslim consumer. This cattle Slaughter issue therefore should not be pitted as Buddhist vs Muslim issue, for beef consumption is not mandatory for the Muslims. As far as the question of cow or bovine meat is concerned, it cannot be projected as part of Islamic identity by any stretch of imagination.

For the Muslims, lessons from India will certainly help. It has been a hundred years since the Muslim community voluntarily gave up eating beef in India respecting the religious sentiments of the Hindus.  In 1919, the idea of refraining from cow slaughter was conceived by nationalist Muslims like Maulana Mohammad Ali, Shaukat Ali, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Mian Haji Ahmed Khatri, Mian Chhotani, Maulana Abdul Bari and Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madani who actively took active part in the Mahatma Gandhi led Khilafat movement that began in 1919. These leading Muslim clerics urged their followers to refrain from cow slaughter and faced stiff opposition from within the community from radical theologians on the subject. Both sides issued extensive fatwas (religious decrees) based on the holy Quran and teachings of Prophet Mohammad (OWBP) to substantiate their line of thinking. Many prominent Muslim scholars now want the Modi government to formulate a uniform law relating to cow slaughter. On their part, some of these intellectuals favour a nationwide blanket ban on cow slaughter. Maulana Mehmood Madani of the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind, an organisation belonging to the Deoband school of thought however feels that the issue of cow protection has been politicised and used as a tool to target the Muslims.  Khwaja Hasan Nizami who wrote Tark-i qurbani-i ga’o in 1921, also cited the Quranic verse: “God does not need the meat and blood of your sacrifices.”. The reality is that it is neither obligatory (wajib) nor mandatory (fard) in Qur’an to consume the meat. Here is what it says with regard to food consumption: “Eat of the good things we have provided you” (Qur’an- 2:168). The Qur’an only permits, and does not necessitate the meat consumption. Throughout the world, the moderate Islamic scholars of both Sunni and Shia schools have endorsed this point. However, eating meat is permissible in Islamic law although eating too much is reprehensible (makruh).”

Overall, thus, the national implications of a cattle slaughter ban should be considered. The cattle economy is a complex economy and several significant industries are intricately connected with it. Faizan Mustafa, a renowned jurist of constitutional law in India however suggests that there is a need to weigh in a range of ecological and environmental issues while taking a call on cow slaughter. The vice chancellor of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad wonders what would happen to non-mulching cows. Some legal experts argue that prohibiting consumption of cattle meat which forms a daily part of consumption habits of one section of the society to maintain the religious sentiments of another section of the society is not a reasonable legislation in a federal nation. 

Besides, a beef ban, as proved in many studies, will have an impact on livestock holdings. Farmers no longer want to own cattle, afraid that when the animals age there will be no resale value for them. There is mounting evidence of how the absence of secure and robust resale values for non-productive cattle has led to decreasing cattle ownership amongst farmers, as it is completely uneconomical for farmers to rear the animal. (The livestock census in India shows that those states with bans on cow slaughter have seen a decline in livestock. Those states with no decline on cow slaughter, on the other hand, have seen their numbers of cows either remain the same or rise). Thus, the cow slaughter ban would be actually “anti-cow.” The result of the Beef Ban Effect will be ‘Stray Cattle, Broken Markets and Boom Time for Buffaloes’. The economic value of an animal, despite it not being purchased by another farmer, exists because of all post-farm downstream economic values of the cattle economy after slaughter: cattle beef as a critical part of food cultures and a cheap source of protein, cattle skin the basis of India’s thriving leather industry …and its offal used widely in the pharmaceutical and manufacturing industries. It would also affect domestic milk farmers who often sell male animals for meat. Also, the importation of meat will result in a spike in beef prices at local markets. 

Thus, in Sri Lanka according to many observers, the timing of the cattle slaughter proposal is driven by political motivations. Cattle slaughter has frequently been raised by Sinhala nationalists and monks to alienate the Buddhist majority from and agitate against the Muslim minority. It is also looking like a tactic to offset some of the controversies the government finds itself embroiled in. At the forefront is the 20th Constitutional Amendment bill, which would weaken curbs on presidential powers. The government has kick-started the legislative process following the amendment draft’s publication recently. Then the public outrage sparked by an imprisoned murderer MP Jayasekara’s swearing-in was diffused to some degree by the proposal to ban cattle slaughter. This swearing in was contrary to the so-called ‘one country –one law’ policy of this government. (Sarath Fonseka and Kuttimani was denied this privilege). Many also consider the ban as “part of the appeasement of the Sinhala Buddhist majority” that will come “at the expense of the ‘Muslim community.” It is thus considered another blow at the pluralism of the population. 

Overall, with hypocrisy linked with ‘Cattle politics’, there are wide implications to consider; as this cattle slaughter ban will affect not only the Muslims but the country as a whole. This ban thus appears to be ill conceived like many other pieces of legislation and policies Sri Lanka have seen in recent times. 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 25
    10

    Largest amount of beef is consumed by Buddhists in SL. MaRa has just gone crazy with misplaced anti-Muslim rage. He is hurting his own people. He is also using this as a stick to get SLMC to support 20A.

    In traditional Buddhist villages young lads would chop off a hind leg of a live bovine cow, roast it and eat it with toddy. In Buddhist villages in the north central they abort the unborn calf, BBQ it and eat it. Hindus chop cows in a Hindu kovil as an offering, cook it and eat it.

    Truth always hurt some people. Truth is no friend of anyone.

    Don’t worry the other powerful person is a heavy bovine beef eater and a venison lover. He used to have a pet shark and feed him calves. He will not allow this ban to go ahead. SLMC must stand firm.

    • 13
      6

      Hindus chop cows in a Hindu kovil as an offering, cook it and eat it.
      ________________________________
      GATAM,
      Is there no end to your rotten imagination. Your ignorance is loathsome.

      • 5
        8

        Nathan,

        There is no end to your rotten imagination and loathsome ignorance.

        Learn something please.

      • 9
        5

        Have you been to the Hindu Kovil where Mervyn Silva, MP saved cows, goats, chicken, etc. from slaughter about a decade ago? Do not lie and learn something please.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBL8DTpGTOI

        • 7
          1

          Gatam
          You moron
          There are no cows in that clip, only goats and chickens.
          You cannot distinguish between cows and goats, you imbecile , is it because you have a drug damaged brain you nitwit.

    • 26
      6

      Follow the teaching of Thirukkural which has brilliantly in simple words stated that if there is no one to eat meat, then there will be no one to kill animals. In contrast Buddha said to his disciples, do not kill animals for food, but if someone offers you meat do not refuse. What logic is that when you cannot get meat without killing animals. Buddhists are following this misguided teaching of Buddha, saying that we will not kill animals but if others slaughter animals for sale, we will buy meat from them and eat.

      • 13
        13

        Poor sod!
        Again trying his hand at twisting, the Buddha’s instructions this time.
        *
        The Buddha did not forbid anything for the layman the way it was in 9 out of 10 commandments.
        Often, guidance for laymen was like good or not good or neutral. He was strict on discipline for the clergy who had to work among the people.
        *
        The rule for the clergy was that they should beg from at most three households and finish their last meal by noon.
        The advise to eat anything that they were offered was based on ethical principles like not offending a donor.
        That has been abused by the clergy in later periods.
        *
        Thirukkural was predominantly Jain inspired and some claim Buddhism as well.
        The rise of Saivaism was at the cost of the annihilation (physical as well) of the Jain faith under Pallava rulers.
        If Saivaism is a religion of peace, are the weapons in the hands of the the deities of the Saivaite and allied faiths for cutting vegetables?
        *
        “What logic is that when you cannot get meat without killing animals.”
        Any thought to the carcasses of dead (but not deliberately killed) animals?

        • 1
          1

          Reading these comments I feel that everyone is talking from the standpoint of religion. Not about basic good or bad for humans to eat any flesh etc.
          Instead of banning this and that, may be if we ban religion, without which we lived till 2700 +/- years ago, there would emerge a compromise that will benefit everyone.
          Consider : Will banning animal slaughter benefit the human race so it will be peaceful and devoid of acrimony or whether banning organised man made religion benefit humankind to live in peace.

      • 9
        3

        Following that advice is up to the individual. The state cannot force it.

        Sri Lanka is not Afghanistan to enforce religious dogma by the state.

        Cow killing must continue as long as fish, goat, chicken (egg), etc. killings continue. Just because Rajapaksa voters are cattle does not mean they should have special rights.

    • 8
      1

      Hindus chop cows inside a Hindu kovil as an offering cook it and eat it. Which Hindu kovil? Most probably a Sinhalese Buddhist temple you attend , that practices Sinhala Buddhism. Do not post nonsense. There were certain Hindu temples in the island that were still practicing the primitive pre historic practice of sacrificing goats and fowl , in their premises. This practice was abhorred by most Saivites and now thankfully has been banned. However a Bull or a Cow will never be sacrificed in any Hindu temple. Do you know what you are posting and what a sacrilege it is?

      • 3
        4

        Siva Sankaran Sharma,
        Dumbo, Sinhala Buddhists never had primitive rituals like killing animals as sacrifice to God like Hindus and Muslims do.

        Dumbo, there are Sinhala Buddhists but there is no such thing as ‘Sinhala Buddhism’.

        “Which Hindu kovil? Most probably a Sinhalese Buddhist temple you attend , that practices Sinhala Buddhism.”

  • 8
    20

    It is certainly not Hypocrisy. I am a vegan. I was an omnivore and new no meal without fish or meat. It was about 30 years ago having halfway read through Dhammapada I realized as a practicing Buddhist that I must give up eating fish and meat. I used to love cheeses and that too I gave up. Buddhism frowns upon all forms of cruelty to all beings. Bless you Mr. Prime Minister.

    • 18
      6

      hanchopancha—- once you die hope you rot yourself in your biblical H E A V E N…..have a nice afterlife… and say hi to GOD for the rest of us destined for HELL ! !
      \
      however article is more written to compare Sri Lanka to dumb A@@@s India…..Editor has completely missed out on benefits of meat consumption….well big story short Try to search the web “health benefits of Consuming beef LIVER….considered even by US heart Association despite their own Radical Vegan Stances….Beef liver is actually a Super Healthy food that anyone can Afford…..
      \
      but what’s up with GMOA….bastard Dr. A. Padeniya went on to whine about some Unfounded BS Science data regarding manner at cows are being killed…..somehow he had forgotten Eggs to Chickens to even the goddamn Trees themselves are living organisms….CT should write another story about GMOA radical vegan ideals and principles

    • 12
      3

      Very true : Buddhism frowns upon all forms of cruelty to all beings.
      So when will the Prime Minister extend the ban to other “beings” like goats chicken and fish ( this after fishing having separate Ministry).

    • 3
      0

      hanchopancha
      you wrote “Buddhism frowns upon all forms of cruelty to all beings. Bless you Mr. Prime Minister.” But your primeminister doesn’t include human beings in the all beings circle.

      • 0
        0

        umberto
        That is correct. Humans are not in the circle of beings.

  • 6
    23

    May be in Hindu and Islam there is no something similar to ‘Paanathipatha Weramani Sikkapadam Samadiyami’. Slaughtering animals as sacrifice to God is practiced in both these religions. That could be the reason why they slaughtered Sinhalayo.

    “All are living beings and Buddhism preaches against all types of killing of praana(living beings) which should extend even to vegetation as well.”

    • 20
      4

      But is not Sinhala Buddhism distinct from the Buddhism that people commonly recognize?
      Otherwise, we cannot understand the way several good SBs justify much of the brutality that has gone on in the name of the land, language and faith, let alone the hate that is spread by some including writers here.

      • 4
        9

        SJ,
        In order to practice Buddhism, Sinhalayo should have a country. When threatened by ‘Para’ people, Sinhala Buddhists and the Buddhist monks have to put country ‘FIRST’ and religion ‘SECOND’.
        Sinhalayo have bitter experiences from Third Century BC because of ‘Para’ Dravida and ‘Para’ European barbaric invaders. The latest Dravida invasion was launched by LTTE Tamil terrorists to grab their land using a bogus claim ‘Traditional Homeland’. Hindu and Christian Tamils slaughtered Sinhalayo for three decades to grab North and East of Sinhale.
        Expecting Sinhala Buddhists to keep on chanting ‘Paanathipatha Veramanee Sikkapadam Samadiyami’ is absurd when threatened by ‘Para’ people who crept into Sinhale illegally and obtained citizenship thanks to kindheartedness of Sinhala Buddhists.

        • 4
          1

          EE
          Buddhism is one system that could have transcended state support and survives.
          It was state sponsorship that corrupted and weakened Buddhism.

    • 11
      6

      Eager less punakku eating puntak –
      \
      Does your para Demala meenachi relish eating the balls [ testicles ] of the bulls which I am reliably informed is your daily menu?
      \
      Don’t you ever feel sorry for the innocents who have to give up their lives to keep frustrated sicko buggers like you in a happy frame of mind and claim bogus refugee status quo in countries like Australia where I am reliably informed by top government/ refugee officials that you were first to seek asylum on the grounds that the Tamil Tigers were after your meenachi for bedding with a petty racist scoundrel of a vampire?
      \
      By the do any of you petty racist scum know what PUNTAK stands for.
      Please enlighten a low caste low or no class Tamil riff raff.?

  • 19
    4

    What’s the position on chicken and fish? Also living creatures.

    • 10
      7

      sonali, what about vegetables….like we the humans takes them away from trees forcefully…..like trees aren’t necessarily capable of resisting us…..so what are we supposed to eat may we should turn to cannibalism

      • 18
        3

        “…we should turn to cannibalism”
        Not a tough proposition for the children of a lion.

        • 4
          5

          SJ,
          It will be even much easier for ‘TIGERS’ who slaughtered Sinhalayo for three decades.

          • 2
            0

            EE
            Do you suggest emulating the Tigers?

  • 11
    4

    Having been an egg consuming for health reasons for the last 42 years I am not against anyone eating meat/fish of any sort but am dead against the cruel ancient draconian methods by which these poor animals are forced to part with their valueless lives,
    \
    In the developed world the animals are stunned with a pistol type of weapon and they are unconscious at the time of their life being taken to satisfy the human palate.
    \
    In nations similar to my motherland, they are beaten with a heavy iron rod whilst they are standing, when they collapse their necks are brutally chopped off whilst they are alive and screaming in agony.
    \
    Once asked a vet from the Dematagoda slaughterhouse about this vile system of taking a life, he is a Moor stated that the Muslim butchers do not allow the humane method of slaughter.
    Why I humbly ask.?
    \
    Alibaba Mahindan Rajapuk’s with his elder son in his old age after being a carnivorous beast on the verge of attempting to reach nirvana has suddenly woken up to his senses and wants to ban only the killing of cattle.

    • 3
      3

      rj1952,
      Not only cattle, Mahinda Rajapakshe banned killing Native Sinhalayo by ‘Para’ Demalu in 2009.

      “wants to ban only the killing of cattle.”

      • 6
        2

        Eagle Brain Dead Blind Eye

        “Not only cattle, Mahinda Rajapakshe banned killing Native Sinhalayo by ‘Para’ Demalu in 2009.”

        Who are these Native Sinhalayo?

        • 2
          2

          I explained this several times but this dumbo cannot get it. Something wrong with functioning of the brain.

          “Who are these Native Sinhalayo?”

          • 2
            1

            Eagle Brain Dead Blind Eye

            “I explained this several times but this dumbo cannot get it. Something wrong with functioning of the brain.”

            You explained nothing with evidence.
            Even your capacity to imagine things is incoherent and illogical.
            I am being very patient with you.
            Try again.

  • 13
    3

    As usual, the prime bullshitting con vile parasite does not mention a letter about the lives of the other animals like chickens, goats, pigs, rabbits, fish etc.
    \
    Are their lives not sacred and valuable.?
    \
    Now they conveniently state the next day that a final decision has been put off for 30 days.
    \
    This is to hit the mouths of the Christians and their Muslim brethren?
    \
    He also stated that they will import already killed beef.
    When they do not have the much needed foreign currency to scratch at their itchy balls from where on earth are they going to source the much needed foreign exchange.?
    \
    All these big worthless talks to fool the RAJE MODAYA’s who are beginning to get wise to their bullshitting verbal diarrhoea – bade yannuwa -loose motions.

  • 20
    2

    Wait for the day the Muslim trader ventures into Fruit & Veg trade.
    Something will be done to make it illegal to cut leaves, stem, flower, fruit, root and seed from plants so that all but Muslims will be eating pork and dog meat.
    *
    The Muslims? They are an enterprising lot and will find a way to survive.

    • 3
      7

      SJ,
      Do they allow killing pigs in Saudi Arabia?
      I am just curious to know.

      • 8
        3

        Eagle Brain Dead Blind Eye

        “Do they allow killing pigs in Saudi Arabia?”

        Are you planning to work there or send your female folks?

        • 2
          3

          Native (Fake) Vedda,
          No we want to send fake Vedda who is a utter disgrace to civilized Vedda Eththo.

    • 4
      2

      SJ

      “Wait for the day the Muslim trader ventures into Fruit & Veg trade.
      Something will be done to make it illegal to cut leaves, stem, flower, fruit, root and seed from plants …………………………….”

      And their willi too.

  • 10
    6

    To all the outraged posters
    .
    Is killing an animal the same thing as eating dead meat?
    Banning the killing of cattle and not, say chickens…..doesn’t MR have to start somewhere?
    Isn’t this just an emotive subject to distract everyone from the Constitutional changes?
    .
    The only articulate post seems to be by rj1952. Well done.

    • 5
      2

      Stanley what do you mean by saying eating dead meat. Is there anything called live meat. However flesh can be obtained from either killing a living animal or extracting it from the carcass of a dead animal.

    • 7
      0

      Stanley

      This is all about how to keep this country under constant crisis. The Sinhala/Buddhists noisy minority cannot and will not live peacefully.

      It has to have imagined enemies.
      Shavendra, Kamal, Weerasekera, Dinesh, Sangili Karuppan Weerawansa, Gunadasa Amarasekara, Shenali Waduge, Udhaya Ganapathipilla, ….. and others are still fighting the LTTE after 11 years of its demise. Please note Amarasekara and Shenali Waduge are the most unhappy persons ever to be born in this island.

      Can those members of saffron brigades who insist on banning cattle slaughter vouch their abstinence from indulging in sex and consuming beef?

    • 1
      0

      “…doesn’t MR have to start somewhere?”
      Stanley, do you mean that there is more to come?

  • 9
    3

    There is no politics or religion or MR gone mad in introducing this law. Its simply to please Modi’s BJP & RSS thugs.

    • 5
      2

      Razuh Langai

      “Its simply to please Modi’s BJP & RSS thugs.”

      Actually it is another ploy by the Sinhala/Buddhist racists to start another round of conflict. These restless noisy Sinhala/Buddhist racist minority needs crisis after crisis for them survive. If there is none they create one after another.

      Refer to today’s cartoon, Modi, BJP, RSS, ….. are awaiting for the right opportunity to export beef.

    • 0
      0

      SJ

      ” Its simply to please Modi’s BJP & RSS thugs.”

      Isn’t this also an attempt to draw some support from the Hindu Tamils?

  • 7
    1

    Many of my SL Buddhist friends are carnivore, the argument being ‘ it was there’ or ‘not slaughtered for me..’, so it is up to the individual to be comfortable with the argument, reasoning being immaterial. As long as there is a demand, there will be a supply, legal or not. Alcohol was prohibited in the 1920s US but it did not stop drinkers, only made gangsters rich from illicit hooch. With a ban on beef, there will be more demand for other meat, including game, hunted from game reserves.

    If I am not mistaken, about 70% of the population of SL are Buddhist & if they all become vegetarian as true believers, there will be at least 50% less demand for meat, assuming that 20% of Buddhists are already vegetarian.

    • 4
      1

      Raj-UK

      “Many of my SL Buddhist friends are carnivore, the argument being ‘ it was there’ or ‘not slaughtered for me..’, so it is up to the individual to be comfortable with the argument, …”

      It won’t be there if there is no demand.
      It is simple demand and supply.

      Since 1948, politics, archaeology, education, religion, regions, land, state institutions, law and order, equality, ….. rights and responsibilities, history, …………… have been saffronised, unfortunately now it is the time for saffronisation of food.

      Soon Gnanasara will be put in charge of saffronisation of sexual relation of consenting couples, in other words public scrutiny of private parts.

  • 4
    1

    Dear LH
    Thank you.
    (1)India is one of the largest beef exporter (slaughtered) and life cattle in the world for a long time. The life cattle export is to the Mideast for Halal slaughter has been a huge industry for a very long time. Many Indians do not even know that too.
    (2) We need to accept the fact Hindus and Buddhists have general dislike to the fact cows are slaughtered period because of their religious affiliations historically.
    (3) Nothing to do with the rights and wrongs vs other animals etc…..yes they are all life’s and need to be respected indeed.
    (4) The Halal slaughter method is also being challenged (kosher too) in many countries add to the drama.
    (5) I remember the old cows are given away/sold to the Muslims who used to come to my village Karainagar to buy them from Hindu families too……those days I think even Muslims were not consuming so much of meat as we had limited cattle and eating meat was a luxury to many of our countrymen?.
    (6) I would not frame all issues to politics as is unfair on real social issues that requires a different journey for our people to develop a system acceptable to all?

    • 3
      0

      (7) Majority of the businesses has to comply to Halal guidelines in most of the Majority Muslim countries?
      (8) SL is not so….means sometimes we need to compromise/import Halal meat remove any unwarranted infringement of rights until we get there to take matters further? It is more like an identity issue is where you have rightfully captured politics but it is not always politics rather expectation of the Majority one may want to respect. One world order and Trade pacts between countries means all this are done with win win between Nations too.
      (9) Yes a potential economical impact to Muslim community could be argued but give and take is always good…..we compromise millions of things around the world for various reasons? it is also diversity too??
      (10) SL is an increasingly populated landscape and more dairy is also locally produced means there will be local need to take care of the local animals too. You can not transport the animals overseas and have them slaughtered and return them as Halal meat would be more cruel to the animals too??
      Yes we need to look at this issue holistically and make a case without always confronting all things partisan??

      • 0
        0

        Per capita beef consumption in SL is increasing rapidly. Over 52% increase in the last 5 years of available data. It is the second most popular meat after chicken.

        Unwise to ban cattle slaughter. Instead the government should invest in more beef production especially in the north which has massive beef potential. There are plenty of grazing grounds and low consumption in the north which means higher sales. It can contribute to north’s economic recovery.

        • 1
          0

          Dear Gatam

          agree with the meat consumption but regards to grazing land north is not so. Is a very dry zone and hardly has green pastures for the domestic animals. Land for grazing for the cattle (purley for meat consumption in our planet) has created deserts out of amazon rainforests and polluted the landscape beyond recognition.

          Without straying away from LH article/argument we as people irrespective of the few differ in all that is sensible we have to cut back on meat consumption for health and environmental reason. Is a separate topic that we should be discussing not religions and languages is the point. This shows even the god can not help the SL mindset. Rather shame on all of us.

      • 1
        0

        I always think this is where we go wrong and run into a stone wall?? create more problems than what was there in the first place….our history is dotted with this kind of confrontations??

  • 1
    3

    ” as this cattle slaughter ban will affect not only the Muslims but the country as a whole. This ban thus appears to be ill conceived like many other pieces of legislation and policies Sri Lanka have seen in recent times. “
    The whole essay is hypocritical prating. More the time passes more of Muslim leaders Boomerangs that returned to them going squeezing their neck. They smart Muslim leaders have transferred to them what was going to Tamils, by working as Muslim movers & Spies. They throw Indian Pakistani Citizenship Act to catch MMDA; The Standardization for few governmental jobs. Now, the farmer who put the Punnakku to the goat is dragging to cut. If the goat cries it is only Hypocrisy of the farmer, will he let it go? Hakeem was ordering from Washington to SLMC Eastern Province sign for Devinegumba, a bill against Tamils 13A. He was in Washington to seek Mrs. Clinton support for a fake proposal of National Action Plan, to abandon LLRC recommendation. In Geneva Hakeem said Muslims were very happy with Old King’s administration. Muslim leaders ate from Old King’s place. Then they said to him “You are Hypocrite” and tried to excrete in his plate. It did not work that east.

    • 1
      0

      There are two subjects over which one should avoid getting involved in arguments.
      Eating animal flesh and sexual morals.
      Because the interlocutor can take you along your own argument to a point you are not prepared to admit.

      Soma

  • 6
    2

    I do not agree with MR on this one. My mother when she was living spent a lot of money saving cows from slaughter. I am not sure how much one can achieve doing that. But to each their own. My father was a vegetarian too. I hate killing animals . I do eat meat. I don’t think we can force our opinions on other people and banning the killing of animals and importing meat only makes one set of people poor while enriching others

  • 6
    1

    This is just a ploy to keep the Buddhist extremists in their base happy, and yet another blow to the Muslims, as most butchers in Sri Lanka are Muslims, and it is their livelihood. So much for uniting the country.

    This is cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face. This is going to backfire big time, as one of our top economic revenues is tourism, and tourists will be disappointed if hotels and restaurants do not serve beef. We will be known as a vacation destination that does not have beef. Imported beef will be incredibly expensive.

    You can bet there will be many members of the Rajapaksa clan, who will indulge in prime steak and expensive cuts of beef, when they go on their endless trips abroad with their privileged friends and relatives. This is all a huge sham, and yet another idiotic Rajapaksa policy that will result in more chaos and confusion.

  • 2
    0

    China has slaughtering machinery and equipment in stock. Import beef from china or india.

    • 3
      1

      RBH59

      “China has slaughtering machinery and equipment in stock. Import beef from china or india.”

      What do you do with economically unproductive cattle?
      Export them?
      Then import beef?
      Have you worked out the final cost to the consumer?

      • 1
        1

        Native Vedda

        The cost will be low the skin will not be retuned make leather products sell and the horns nomally used to make washsers or handy craft.

  • 5
    0

    Actually I have never understood this desire to eat meat. People eat it for the taste, not the texture. This taste is mainly from the gravy. All one has to do is to prepare the normal curry gravy and pour it over rice, potatoes etc and you have the taste of meat. There….CT’s first cookery lesson!
    .
    On another point, meat does not have to be imported if it is banned. Just do without it. The price will rise, but that will only affect the rich. The poor can barely afford a meal of rice let alone meat. Be sensible like Asoka. Don’t ban fishing because too many livelihoods depend on it, but discourage it.
    .
    Of course all this is irrelevant because this is just another of Percy’s ploys to distract us from the main issue of the day.

    • 4
      1

      Stanley

      What do you do with the unproductive redundant cattle, keep them in various army camps, Vihares, Rajapaksas properties and fields, …. Gnanasara’s Amude, … who is going to pay for the food and maintenance of unproductive cattle?

      Even if you find solution for these issues what is the guarantee the safforanistas will stop at that. Gnanasara may want to perform virginity tests on underage Muslim female children, ban anything that resembles halal certification, ban all practising Muslim Doctors, …. blanket ban on minority participation in politics, ….

      All those 15,000 single handed Sri Lankan generals are indulging themselves in politics, threatening minorities with statements that are uncalled for, including Shavendra, Kamal, Jaffna Commander Senarath Bandara, forgetting their role and responsibility in a “DEMOCRATIC” society and the limitations imposed by constitution and armed forces regulations, …..

  • 1
    0

    There are two subjects over which one should avoid getting involved in arguments.
    Eating animal flesh and sexual morals.
    Because the interlocutor can take you along your own argument to a point you are not prepared to admit.

    Soma

    • 1
      1

      somass

      Please clarify your points (if there is any) with detail pictures.

      “Because the interlocutor can take you along your own argument to a point you are not prepared to admit.”

      This is little Lanka, and some of them are little Lankies, obviously they do not admit anything. Have you ever admitted when you were wrong?

      Whose business interest does banning cattle slaughter serves.
      A few days ago Basil said the state is compelled to take over retail distribution under one state institution. Do you read anything.

      By the way what is happening to Oddusuddan tile factory. Wimal promised to recommission it before April 2020. He has roped in DSI. How did he chose this particular business to reconstruct the tile factory given that there are quite a few who has the resources, experience, …expertise, etc?

      • 1
        0

        NV
        Tell me your position on eating animal flesh.
        With a couple of questions I can easily demonstrate that you are a hypocrite.
        .
        Tell me your position on sexual morality.
        With a couple of questions I can easily demonstrate that you are a hypocrite.
        .-
        Soma

        • 1
          0

          soma

          “Tell me your position on eating animal flesh.”

          I am a vegetarian and a teetotaler for most of my life.
          I don’t mind people eating meat, fish. … and I don’t want others forcing me to eat or refrain from eating a particular type of food. Its for individuals to decide after a certain age.
          Look MR/GR wanted to win 2/3 majority hence they promised all sorts of B/S. They thought they could also b**l s**t the saffron brigades. Now it appears the saffron brigade has caught MR by his clanking b***s.

          Both promised lot more to please their core supporters, the noisy minority. When it comes to delivery they know there are very many “Election Promises” .. they can’t deliver in the real world. Only way out is to keep different section of the community at loggerheads at the cost of foregone development. In the meantime

          “Tell me your position on sexual morality.”

          I have never been judgemental about people’s sexual preferences. What I don’t like is when people lie, when they are being complete hypocrites.

          As far as I am concerned consenting adults could enjoy each other without hurting each other.

          I guess you are interested in kinky sex.
          Go ahead enjoy without being inhibited by your sham culture.

          • 0
            1

            Sorry to disappoint you. I avoid getting involved in arguments over eating animal flesh or sexual morality.

            Soma

            • 1
              0

              soma

              “I avoid getting involved in arguments over eating animal flesh or sexual morality.”

              It’s a good “IDEA” however if you could avoid
              a. justifying unjustifiable acts,
              b. supporting war criminals
              c. supporting human rights violators
              d. supporting fascist tendency
              e. defending crooks, thieves, murderers, …..
              f. supporting dictators
              g. supporting undemocratic treatment of people
              h. defending racists, bigots, Champika, Weerasekera, Weerawansa, Dhinesh, ….
              i. celebrating Ranavirases being war heroes
              j. celebrating MR, GR, BR, NR, …. being war heroes
              k. …..


              Have you ever studied under colonial teachers, priests or attended pirivena as you seemed to express some sort of dislike for sex?

              I do not mind listening to your confessions.

  • 1
    0

    Government makes a U-turn on cattle slaughter ban.

    (It was never gazetted anyway!)

    Good decision.

    Get back to your steak!

  • 2
    0

    Beef lovers can always visit Dubai for a sumptuous meal. Alternatively, those who love beef can create some more foreign exchange debt to import beef. Butchers can become fruit sellers and the cows will live longer and die eventually just like the aged/outdated hypocrites/politicians elected to rule over the sheeple.

  • 0
    0

    What will happen to leather industries good for china and india and bangladashe
    they can export to all countries since the demand from sri lanka will produce a variety of leather goods,and small leather industries tailored and mostly daily carry/wear items like Wallets, Belts, Notebooks covers, Fobs and accessories and have a line of apparel as well.

  • 2
    0

    hanchopancha
    you wrote “Buddhism frowns upon all forms of cruelty to all beings. Bless you Mr. Prime Minister.” But your primeminister doesn’t include human beings in the all beings circle.

  • 2
    0

    One million years of eating beef and GoSL is trying to play the evolutionary God!
    *
    Cattle, stupid slow moving animals with a lot of flesh to eat, have been algorithmically programmed for over a millennia to accept death to feed homo sapiens, lions, tigers, and leopards. They die knowing that they have fulfilled their purpose of existence. Then in heaven, they ask to be reborn again as cattle so they can fulfilling their evolutionary urge (unless they achieved nirvana with no cravings before they died).
    *
    But what about the animals in the forests that are being cut down rampantly, that are not programmed to be eaten by humans- butterflies, birds, peacocks, bears, elephants, frogs, snakes, ladybirds, squirrels, leopards. Bad karma for those who bulldoze their habitats.

  • 0
    0

    Why is it so difficult for the Sinhalese to get even simple things like stopping slaughter of cows done in this country, without it affecting the Muslims and the Tamils adversely, and all the mocking and allegations that follows? Surely its not only Muslims and Tamils that eat beef, but also Sinhalese, and its not only Muslims and Tamils who have cattle, its also Sinhalese. Ideally all animal slaughter should be stopped, but that would be difficult due to alot of factors, mainly nutrition and the minority whinings. Why are the Tamils who are well over 50% Hindus, criticizing the government for this? Isn’t it out of pure malice and hatred of the Tamils towards the Sinhalese? Stopping cow slaughter has been a pressing issue for the Buddhists for a very long time. Surely, this cannot affect anybody so very badly.

    • 1
      0

      Punchi Point
      Punchi Brain
      Punchi Willi

      “Why is it so difficult for the Sinhalese to get even simple things like stopping slaughter of cows done in this country, “

      It is economy stupid.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.