Muslims defend pig farmer’s freedom

The fruit of an unnatural union between Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant and a laboratory pig

emailed to:

[email protected]

Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Executive Division
P.O. Box 30028  Lansing, MI 48909

To Whom It May Concern,

As-salaamu alaikum,

It has come to our attention that your agency has ordered pig farmer Mark Baker to destroy his herd of Mangalista heritage pigs. We also understand that you are fining Mr. Baker $700,000 for refusing to kill all of his pigs immediately.

Why the fatwa* on Mr. Baker’s pigs? They are guilty of the crime of being natural, normal pigs – not  Monsanto (TM) genetically-modified pork-bearing artificial life forms. If one of Mr. Baker’s natural, healthy pigs escaped and “porked” one of the neighboring farmer’s Monsanto (TM) pseudo-pigs, the bacon they’d be makin’ would not be 100% Monsanto (TM) bacon-flavored food substitute. While such an act would admittedly be sordid and disgusting, and would reflect poorly on Mr. Baker’s pig’s taste in female pigs, executing all of Mr. Baker’s pigs to pre-emptively prevent something like this from occurring seems to us to be a gross over-reaction.

And while the insertion of a few natural pig-genes into Monsanto’s artificial bacon might pose a problem for Monsanto, which is trying to condition American consumers to accept its brand of 100%-genetically-modified unfood, the slight chance of such pig-on-plastic porking hardly seems adequate grounds for your mandated porcine hecatomb.

As a Muslim, I do not eat pork. And as a sentient, conscious being, I certainly do not eat Monsanto’s test-tube-originated genetically-modified ersatz pork product.

But we Muslims believe in freedom. That’s why Muslim-ruled lands have been protecting the rights of non-Muslims to eat pork and drink alcohol – which we Muslims believe have been forbidden by God – for 1,400 years.

As a Muslim, I must enjoin good and forbid evil. And one of the worst evils is oppression and tyranny.

Your attack on Mr. Baker’s pigs is tyrannical and oppressive.

Stop it.

Now.

Sincerely,

Dr. Kevin Barrett, Islamic Freedom Forum

* Note: The word “fatwa” has been misconstrued by the media as a “death sentence.” In reality, it just means “legal opinion issued by a Muslim scholar.” So I am misusing the word here, just for fun.

_ _ _

The Bakers are asking for help in their struggle against tyranny and oppression:

Ways you can help:  1) July 12: Court at 111 Canal St. Lake City, MI starts at 2 pm, come early! It would be great to fill the 100 seats with supporters! 2) July 13: Celebration of the Farm at Baker’s Green Acres, starting at 10 am, food at 1pm, ending at 9 pm or so. Come for a hog roast fundraiser. A silent auction is planned and we have room for more donations–call 231-825-0293 or e-mail [email protected] More information here: Court and a Party 3) Join the community of supporters at Pledgie: http://pledgie.com/campaigns/20620  Jill

 

 

Related Posts:



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on July 3, 2013, With 3352 Reads Filed under Humor, Of Interest. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

FaceBook Comments

2 Responses to "Muslims defend pig farmer’s freedom"

  1. leecahalan  July 3, 2013 at 4:28 pm

    The cloning and subsequent patenting of DNA products is both a scary and at times humorous condition. To think that Monsanto would actually go as far as suing someone for not breeding their cloned pigs. Or for giving natural pigs quarter with their Frankenpigs…

    As an aside some human rights activists are watching the DNA patent laws being litigated with interest. A man, especially a young man might possibly inoculate himself from the unwanted pregnancy an unscrupulous woman might surprise him with. If he had already patented his biological DNA? Then she had used his patented material without his consent. This not only preventing the man from paying child support but opening the conniving mother up to lawsuit and having the kid taken away at her own cost.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH
From Veterans Today Network