My point is, regardless of whether it is religious reasons or not, that they don't eat a specific meat, if the body isn't used to digesting it, it can cause severe problems.

7 years ago, I'd eat pork and beef products 4 or 5 times a week, now a couple of grams and I am ill.

If, for religious reasons, they have never eaten certain types of meat, I would assume that they could easily have similar physical reactions.

It's prison. You eat what you get. If you don't, you starve. Simple.

If you really don't want to be fed pork due to some religious or other reason, don't do crime. Again, simple.

I understand your PoV but you really can't go making prisoners ill, and personally I do think religion is a good enough reason not to eat meat.

There should be a vegetarian option. That would cater for any religion I know of. It wouldn't even be more expensive - beans are really cheap, compared even to horse meat. It would certainly be cheaper than providing multiple options of different special meats, and would cover my personal objection to the idea of my taxes paying for Halal slaughters.

Most religions ave a code of conduct which are basically:
Don't go around killing people
Don't steal stuff
Don't be some kind of sexual predator
As well as those designed to make sure that you don't swan off to another religion.

Effectively, our laws are based on these (as are most countries). So it goes without saying that if you are religious, then you will be following these rules anyway and therefore not going to fall foul of the law.

If you claim to be religious, but end up in the nick because you broke the law, then really you can't be that serious about your faith, so you suddenly getting all upset with what food they give you really reeks of chutzpah. So, tough.

Prisons are not hotels. They are as much a deterrent as they are for rehabilitation and protecting the rest of society from the wrongdoing of the worst we have. If you know that the food may not fit in with your particular choice of food, then you are less likely to do something that will put you there.

I have little or no sympathy for fussy eaters (religious, political, etc.) when it comes to prison. Unless you have a genuine medical condition (that can be verified independently), then you get what you get.

It makes the punishment far worse than that prescribed by the judge. It's the mental equivalent being told to eat excrement for however long, in addition to the actual sentence. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

What I do wonder though is whether the "traces of pork DNA" were just due to the preparation method. If the traces were something like 1 part per thousand, then it's more a question of bad practice that is likely found in many places serving both Halal and "normal" meals.

I don't seen any particular reason why the tax payer should be footing any sort of a bill here. The problem is with the supplier who certified the food as being compliant with Halal requirements. If someone is going to be taken to court it should be 3663. Whether that's how it actually pans out is a different matter of course.

There are lots of ways to end up in prison, which do 't break religious laws. And some religeous laws between faiths are contradictory.

Like the family that killed their daughter/sister last year, because she had the audacity to go out with a German boy, instead of going into the arranged marriage. The father talked his 4 sons into kidnapping her, from her boyfriend's flat and stabbing her to death. The slns are now doing life and the father is on trial. He still claims to have done nothing wrong, his daughter was the one who did wrong!

But what about speeding? People have been locked up in the UK for driving too fast, one bike rider i 2000 got 6 months for riding 160 on the motorway. Which religious law is that breaking?

That would prevent further mistakes and make the industry much more careful of food labelling.

To my knowledge, all major faiths also state that you should obey the law of the land...

3663, what a surprise. They sent a rep round to my sister and brother-in-laws pub and he said, "I don't care what you can supply me, I don't want someone driving past my pub and thinking you're one of my suppliers".