This is in reference to people’s edit dated April 21, 2015 by Srinivas Kamat. The ‘real issues’ raised by the author appear to be more of ‘fallacy of an educated mind’ and less of rational argument. Some points to be reconsidered:
Beef eating is not a religious issue. In India itself there are Christians who are pure vegetarians and there are non-vegetarians who do not eat beef per se. And there are Converts who have maintained their original dietary habits (vegetarian or non-vegetarian) and that has nothing to do with religious faith. So also Vegetarianism is not anybody’s patented right.
That ‘all religions declare that killing any animal is criminal’ begs a seriously ‘rational’ research by the author.
Faith and religion knows no boundaries nor is any religion regional. What does the author intend to prove or propagate by terming Christianity ‘essentially foreign religion’ if not religious intolerance, selective targeting of Christians and self proclaimed superiority of his own religion?
Controlling the inevitable process of ‘global warming’ just by embracing vegetarianism sounds to be the fallacy of an obsessive mind. It also fits into ‘shorkareinsheraur hum pakddechuva’. Following the same (ir)rational argument how about trying to stop exhaling carbon dioxide instead, because it has the highest percentage of all greenhouse gases. (learning the process and importance of Food Chain in an ecosystem will help clear this doubt from educated minds).
The economics of meat eating presented by the author is derogatory and at the same time irrational. Meat eating has not been invented to dispose off the left overs of leather and hide industry.
And lastly, expressing our disgust against the dictatorship of our legislators is not an emotional outburst rather just the first step in combating the unjust regulations.
Bolmax Pereira, Quepem
