Different animal and religion, yes, but similar though much limited restriction.
Eating pork in public isn't banned in Israel.
The Cow is revered at different levels in India. From a 'mother' to a 'diety'.
The comparator would be eating pork in a Islamic State.
In the multicultural society, we need tolerance. The ban on beef is not intolerance, but a form of tolerance. You are welcome to eat any meat, but beef. This is at best an inconvenience, but of great significance to Hindus.
This again brings up a similar topic of tolerance of intolerance.
Here is the bargain that exists in a multicultural, multilinguistic, multireligious society like India (There is no other country that comes even close) - We don't eat Beef or Pork. There, all accomodated, tolerated and agreed upon.
Simple social contracts work.
Not really. Mohammedans don’t revere the pig; they think it is filthy.
> The ban on beef is not intolerance, but a form of tolerance.
That’s nonsense on stilts. It is textbook intolerance.
Beef is an absolutely delicious meat (so’s pork too, by the way). Hamburgers, steaks, roast beef, beef stew, cottage pie: to a very great extent beef is what food is.
I believe that it’s actually worse in America: to my knowledge, it is illegal to sell horse or dog meat at all in America. Which is intolerant and frankly stupid.
I love my dog, but it’s no skin off my back if someone else eats his.
On the other hand, I suppose one could see such bans as a symptom of rising Hindu nationalism at the expense of India's minority populations. That's definitely more concerning.