Pork and Prejudice

(or 'Why Subway Is Allowed to Cater to the Muslim Community')

I've never been to Subway. My mum went once and got food poisoning, so that kind of warned me off eating there. I have, however, heard many people raving about how nice it is, so maybe I'll give it a shot sometime.

However, it appears that, were I to feel an intense need to combine eating pork products and visiting
companies named after public walkways in the near future, I would be hard pushed to find one- unless there's an eatery out there called Zebra Crossing or something. Yes, it's true: Subway is banning ham and bacon from 185 of its branches, in response to pressure from the Muslim population, and will now be exclusively selling Halal products in said branches. This is a bold move and, as such, has generated a great splurge of public opinion. A lot of which I don't agree with.

Many people have been crying out that it's unreasonable to do such a thing. The words 'pathetic', 'Christian country', 'piss take' and 'immigrants' have been thrown around. Quite a few people have reacted negatively. This is sad because- let's be real for a second- it won't make but a small impact- if any- on these peoples' lives when this change is put into action. Either they don't frequent one of the selected outlets (or Subway in general), or they do and they dislike the products that include pork, or the ham sub is the only thing that gets them through the day. If you are vehemently against Subway's move and you fall into either of the first two categories, then you can just piss off. This will not affect you in any way whatsoever. Get off the hate train at the first stop. If you're in the last group, then I hope you get better soon. I also rather think that you'd be perfectly happy with one of the other items on the Subway menu. It's not like they're banning all meats. Chill the hell out.

Aside from the tantrums caused by the loss of something that did no nutritional good anyway and did nothing to enrich lives, there have been some reactions that cause me deep concern. These are the ones involving jabs at Islam, and insinuations that Subway is somehow being weak by 'bending to the will' of the Muslim population. They are being anything but weak- in fact, it's a very clever move. I mean, can you imagine how much money they're going to make from Muslims who flock in because of this policy change? It's just about the best publicity they could hope for. And as for the commenters shouting that their country shouldn't have to change to cater to those not born there, they fail to recognise one of the great redeeming features of Great Britain: its acceptance, tolerance and generosity towards those of different cultures, countries and continents. We are a great humanitarian country. We take in everyone who needs our assistance, and allow them to stay as long as they please. This has been going on for so long that most of the people being labelled as 'immigrants' were probably born in Bournemouth or Dudley. Or Milton Keynes.

But the complaints that annoy me most of all are those that focus on the fact that Britain is 'Christian', and that a 'Christian' country doesn't have to accept changes from people not like their own. This is disgusting on a base level. First of all, I doubt many of the people saying this actually believe in a God- they just like Easter eggs and Christmas presents and think that's enough. To them, the cross is more of a fashion statement than a religious symbol. Secondly, what they imply about Christianity is that it is a gated community, whereas it is quite the opposite- the source material (The Bible, in case you weren't aware) is a book that preaches love and acceptance to people from all walks of life. And finally, Jesus himself- who was a pretty important part of the Bible, so I hear- regularly made it his business to accept people who were either different or disliked, from lepers to prostitutes to tax collectors. He probably would've even gone for lunch with estate agents if they'd existed. Now, I myself am a pretty staunch Atheist, and as such believe the Bible to be largely a work of fiction, but I can still appreciate the message it preaches. And I can also see the way that people are completely disregarding this major theme in the religion that they are ignorantly trying to use as a shield to cover their own indignant racism.

Here's the thing. If you can't accept the fact that Muslims live in Britain, then you clearly aren't British. You stand against everything your country- and the religion you claim it upholds- has stood for for many, many years. Why then, by your own standards, don't you go and live somewhere else? Somewhere that hates just as much as you, with as little justification as you? I hear North Korea's lovely this time of year.

Independence Don't

(or 'Why I'll Be Voting Against An Independent Scotland')

I'm sure you've seen or heard the news at some point recently. I'm one hundred percent sure that this has happened. You would have to be both deaf and blind or live in a cave to have not been exposed to news. So, seeing as this is the case, you don't need me to tell you that Scotland will be making a pretty big decision at the end of September with regard to its connection to the United Kingdom. In fact, 'a pretty big decision' is an extreme understatement, because the outcome of this referendum will unquestionably change many important aspects of how Scotland as a country operates. Either it remains a part of the UK or it becomes independent. It's a big deal.

As a Scottish citizen, I have the right to vote in this referendum, and I will be voting an emphatic 'no'. Independence would be an unequivocally bad move on all the levels. The Scottish have always been a fiery people, and some have long wished to separate their country from Britain, which it sees as an over-protective mother, not letting them spread their wings and take flight on their own. What they fail to see is that their wings wouldn't provide nearly enough lift to get them off the ground in the first place.

I'm sure you've heard the expression 'trying to run before you can walk'. Scotland trying to survive and thrive as an independent country would be equivalent to trying to run before you've been born. The requirement of all matters to pass through Westminster, as emasculating as it may be to the nationalists, provides the sole link- the umbilical cord, if you will- through which Scotland receives all the nutrients it needs. Among them: free healthcare; a stable, established currency; a presence in the EU, with all the trade benefits implied therein; and- perhaps most importantly to me, given my age and stage in life- free university tuition for its native population. Sever the connection with London and you sever the supply of many things that make the average Scottish citizen's life markedly easier and more comfortable. NHS? Forget it. An army? Only the regiments that belong to you. Scotland wouldn't even be a member of the EU anymore, which would mean immigration control on all traffic in and out of the country, including the other countries of the British Isles- a huge administrative and financial strain in and of itself.

And yet, Mr Salmond claims that these losses and repercussions will not be an issue. Somewhere in his half-baked and half-cocked plan, he says, are answers to all these problems and more. And yet the only solution that he has thus far revealed is to presume that the rest of the world is going to let him keep everything. On EU membership he proclaimed, "Well, of course they'll let us join!", to which the EU said, "LOL no". On national currency, he brazenly stated that "We'll be allowed to keep the pound!" The Treasury replied with "Not on your nelly". We can only assume that the rest of his 'plan' rest on similarly shaky grounds.

And yet his movement has gained significant momentum- enough, indeed, to make this daft referendum a thing. Several of my own Scottish friends and family, all of whom I consider to be logical and sensible people, are inexplicably- to my eyes, at least- behind the cause. This is highly worrying. If it were to come out at the end of September that more people were for independence than against, it would set into motion a series of events and plans that would, by 2016 (when independence would officially begin), have formed a noose for Scotland to compliantly fill with its neck. And then, when the chair is kicked out from underneath us, we'd realise our mistake and reach out desperately towards England, gasping and gurgling, imploring them to take our weight. And would they? Would they hell.

It's a heavy-handed image, but it does get my point across rather nicely- that an independent Scotland is incapable Scotland. So I'll be voting 'no', and if you are able to, I advise you to do the same. It's our homeland, and it'd be a real shame to watch it kill itself.