I’m sure our muslim friends and neighbors will appreciate our concern for their health. Oh, it’s against their religion? That’s ok, we can stock our stores with molasses. That’s not against anyone’s religion is it?

Most religious food proscriptions originated in the dim past from perfectly sane observations. For example, the ban on the consumption of pork by Jews and Moslems almost certainly arose from the observation that many ancient people who ate pork died rather horribly (from trichinosis). Not knowing the cause, what could these people suppose except that God was punishing them for eating something He didn’t want them to? The ban on pork undoubtedly saved the lives of thousands of Jews and Moslems and was, therefore, quite beneficial. Since then, however, God had vouchsafed us the revelation of the cause of the sickness and we can now produce pork that is safe and nutritious. The sane conclusion is that He has released us from the proscription and, therefore, the continued insistence on dogma is superannuated and harmful.

The bad effects of the consumption of alcohol (ethanol) is still obvious. Without a doubt, the proscription of its consumption is still saving thousands of Muslims and is a good thing. Until, that is, it is taken to absurd lengths by ignorant religious fanatics. How in heaven’s name can the consumption of a frickin’ French fry offend God when the alcohol therein can only be detected by the most sophisticated GC-mass spec laboratory analysis? Certainly God can’t object to us eating food contaminated by the inevitable few skin cells sloughed off the hand of the cook on the basis of His ban on cannibalism! Such attitudes on the part of fanatical Muslims can only be, as Lydia suggests, a manifestation of a desire for political power having nothing to do with religion.

If our society insists on altering its ways so as not to offend, then it is time for non-Muslims to announce, in no uncertain terms, that WE are offended by people who refuse to wash their hands. WE are offended by being refused taxi service by Muslim drivers in Minneapolis if we happen to be carrying a bottle of scotch as a hostess gift to the people we are visiting. WE are offended because our children are refused a piggy bank to encourage saving. WE are offended at being blown to bits for any reason whatsoever. WE are offended if our fiancée is killed by his or her parents because we are not Muslim. What say you, Western Societies, what are you going to do to avoid offending US? Or are you so bigoted that we don’t count?

Actually, some Muslims evidently don’t “get” the fact that they are different kinds of alcohol, and there have been reports (which I don’t have time to look up again tonight) of refusal by Muslim visitors to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer when entering British hospital wards. These hand sanitation things are set up to try to prevent the spread of antibiotic-resistant staff infections in the hospital, but they didn’t enforce them against the Muslims. Who, of course, probably weren’t quite _so_ stupid as sincerely to believe the sanitizers were forbidden by their religion but were just looking for another chance to push the envelope.

You are of course, correct, these are different alcohols. But, I wonder, would it really matter to the fanatics and these touchy-feely regulators?

Those who promote it need to revisit your early history (I am in the U.S. where our principles of freedom are based on that very event).

Yes, I could spell it how for you right now, but I think some of you need to do a little research.
Hint: Go back a few centuries.

“For your protection, personnel handling and preparing the food served in this establishment make regular use of alcohol-based hand sanitizers.”