Frederick Noronha wrote: I am specifically referring to the point of whether a supposedly secular State should lay down bans on any particular food based on the eating preferences of a section of the population.
So what level of "purity" is right to be accepted? Maneka Gandhi has some good arguments against milk. Should we ban that too? For liquor, of course, one has to go to Gandhi's views and Gujarat. And so on... Why not go the whole hog? == RESPONSE == Dear FN, I submit that when one is an organiser of an event (or a moderator of a discussion list), one takes all reasonable steps to ensure that the event (or discussion list) proceeds as smoothly as possible. There are no special prizes for allowing anarchists and other riff-raff elements to disrupt what has taken years to put together. We saw that not to long ago in Toronto; and I am not referring to the G20 summit. Would you not agree that for the duration of the Games, the minor inconvenience (to some) of not having beef served to them at the games, is potentially less of a problem than the security issue which might be posed by the arrival of trainloads of 'anarchists and other riff-raff elements' into 'town'? So, why this 'beef' about the non-serving of beef? jc ps: Perhaps, if these were Manekan or Gandhian days, the risk-assessment would have indicated other 'temporary' bans. Has Goanet not banned/expelled (what the moderators considered) troublesome elements from GoaNet? Could one not put the same set of arguments to you as you are putting wrt 'beef at the Games'? * * * IS YOURS one of the stories of Goans on board the S.S. Dwarka, or at the Strait of Hormuz, Basra or Bahrain, Dubai, Swindon, Mombasa, Poona or Rangoon? Selma Carvalho's new book *Into the Diaspora Wilderness* docks at many other ports. Get your copy from Broadways, Panjim [9822488564] Rs 295. P&p extra. http://selmacarvalho.squarespace.com/
