andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2020-06-19 12:00 pm
jack: (Default)

[personal profile] jack 2020-06-19 05:31 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't think I would want the government to judge who is a Muslim and give out food on that basis. I know some countries have that problem of society policing religious mores and it is horrible: the government typically shouldn't have any knowledge of your level of observance. But I don't *think* that's the most likely failure mode in the UK.

If there were a more inclusive alternative I would have assumed it involved having two or three basic options available to cover the most common needs, and allowing people to choose.

I am torn because I am fortunate enough I usually am in situations where I am offered a choice or can make my own arrangements, and I don't want to be oblivious to many people not having the chance. But also, I don't think religion should be a privilege available only to people who can afford it, if there's food made available to people who can't shop during the pandemic it should make some effort to see that people can eat it.

[personal profile] anna_wing 2020-06-20 04:56 am (UTC)(link)
Someone from UNICEF told me once that they hand out emergency rations to some extent regardless of whether it is exactly what the recipients are used to eating, because (a) sometimes it's what they have, and (b) the recipient can usually sell or trade the item, thus also helping to get the local economy moving again. They don't worry too much about seeing some food aid ending up in local markets. If people want to sell their biscuits and buy rice, that's fine.