Should the State government regulate citizen’s food choices? Give reasons

Some of those who voted YES had this to say: 

•    If the state government regulates the food choices for the citizens they will surely provide all the necessaries (nothing much will change) but it will also help to eradicate illegal stuffs that is hard to be controlled. The import and export will be thoroughly checked and it can also help promote the goods produced by the framers of our state which in a way provides incentives for the citizen of our states. This can be one of the beginning steps towards making our state a self sufficient one.

•    We Nagas should be aware of the difference between companion animals and livestock animals. Dog was the first domesticated animal and they used to hunt alongside humans. They were kept more for companionship and less for meat.  In the present scenario, dogs are used worldwide in Police dept, military, as service animals for especially abled people or for companionship in general. The idea of civilization and the food habits of people are constantly changing with advancement, according to that some traditional customs or I should say old habits of dog meat consumption should also be stopped for our society to go forward.

•    Even in its best is but necessary evil, in its worst, an intolerable one.


Some of those who voted NO had this to say:  

•    According to me 'no.’ How can one dictate someone to say 'yes/no' to eat a particular food. Individual choices differ. So it must be a choice. Even in a family, food habits differ.

•    We kill cattle and poultry for meat; deprive young calf from their mother's milk for our dairy needs, so why is killing a dog for consumption called "slaughter.” Only some hundreds eat dog amongst the lakh of Nagas, but the majority has never suppressed the latter because we understand the right for a choice, not solely on the fact that our ancestors ate them. It must be understood that the decision of the government hurts the morale and sentiments of the people for questioning their values and way of life, which brings us back to Cultural Chauvinism. The statements made by different organisations are degrading and should be liable for prosecution as it had zero truths brought from the actual reality. I understand that in growing times a huge generation of Naga youths and parents don't eat dogs and have become wholly attached to dogs and do not see them as food, but some don't and it's okay to see them as food. Ban the illegal acts of smuggling and don't Poke Into Other's Kitchen. Being Pro Choice is the key.

•    No. The Government or anybody should not dictate someone's choice of food. In case of meat and poultry they should ensure legal clean certified supply instead of banning what not.

•    Where's our freedom of choice?

•    Nagaland as under Indian State is a democracy, isn't it? For the government to pass and issue orders within the mandate of Naga population, it shows a narrow approach, we are not a communist Nation!

•    The government should have at least issued a public discourse/debate/poll/consensus on the food ban, before attacking Naga Plates. It is extremely apathetic to see the elected government, time and again fail to see and understand the public grievances, ranging from our bad roads, unemployment, backdoor appointment, nepotism, and now ban on the food of its own people. It’s high time the existing government starts to really think for the welfare of its people, for which reason it is elected and chosen to do so.

•    No, until or unless the food habit can harm oneself. Tobacco & liquor are banned for the same reason. Yes, in some part of states certain meat can be banned for social harmony but only restricted to that state and not to pan India. I am from Tribal Majority state Chhattisgarh; here certain food habits are acceptable widely among masses.

•    No. It's an individual’s choice.

•    Government cannot because their concern is always about party and not about their people.

•    One community cannot say to others bro.., you eat axone pickle and you eat axone salad and sis you also drink axone soup etc etc. We have to respect one another.

•    No. As long as someone doesn't kill others pet then Government should not regulate citizen’s food choice.

•    By banning the age-old food habit, the state is interfering with Naga tradition. It makes no sense whatsoever when a certain animal considered as sacred by the mainland people is a delicacy in the state and eaten without any issue, but another animal domesticated as a pet for its cuteness and greetings is banned. This is a case of state interference into citizens' food choice or the right to life under Article 21 and Naga custom and tradition under Article 371A of the constitution.

•    Not government business; will eat dog meat or any thing I like it's my birth right.

•    No... Not at least in any of the Northeastern state's especially in our State.

•    No. No one has the right to control one's food habits until & unless it is harmful for his/her own health.

•    No the government has no right to dictate what an individual should eat it must instead make sure that whatever a citizen desires is hygienic and of good quality.

•    Its none of their bossiness.

•    Nagaland Government submitting to a few individuals pressure, and going ahead banning the sale and eating of dog meat just to please some non-Nagas is so pathetic. It is disheartening to have a leader who cannot speak about the nature of its society and people. Should the state government dictate the Nagas on what to eat and what not to eat? No!

•    When there are rules and regulations for every activity of human being then is it wrong to regulate food habits. The earth is getting over whelmed with human habitations, though the earth is not just for human beings. People should learn to eat for hunger rather than eat for the sake of food.

•    If 'yes' then, where is the Freedom of Choice? I am afraid tomorrow the government will decide what your hobby should be.

•    Keeping in mind the democratic nature of the society an individual or community's food choice/s should not be imposed on someone else arbitrarily. The state Government should respect and safeguard the food habits of its citizens, not ban them.

•    There may arise partiality even among the staff selection board. This sickness of partiality/ tribalism or money laundering practices is already deep rooted within our Naga society, and so it may take time for correction/cure for these malpractices unless, something unexpected happens.

•    It's just like a job profession, one professional mal-practicing officer retires but another fellow Officer of the same family replaces him/her. It's just like a professional gazetted inter- departmental job exchange type to fool the simple publics.

•    One cannot guarantee that the Board members will not sell themselves. Old habits die hard (especially when it has become a way of life for the Nagas).

    The food that we consume is a matter of choice, so it's not right to regulate citizens’ food choices. The people who are passing all this and that regulation are the one who consume almost everything they see, then why impose regulations?


Some of those who voted OTHERS had this to say: 

•    The question itself sounds very stupid. It doesn’t deserve any answer. It’s just a matter of common sense.