kosher and halal meat

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

a crude title for this thread i know but...

should it be outlawed? i'm not sure - a rare thanks to c-man for the article link and prompting debate. i was actually interested in why he did not seem to be convinced when both Jewish and Muslim practitioners claim their methods are quite humane.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:45 (twenty-one years ago)

cruel barbaric, but not as cruel and barbaric as factory farming. I am also not very disposed to religions of all flavours right now, so ban it but ban factory farming first.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Both are cruel and inhumane... but nowhere near as inhumane as not locking this thread RIGHT NOW.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Apologies for the whiny-metabullshit... ignore me.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:51 (twenty-one years ago)

The real question is whether alleviating the suffering of the animals that are going to be killed and eaten regardless is actually worth the cost of further alienating a religious group that is feeling pretty fucking alienated in much of the Western world as it is, and the likely consequences of that alienation.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:53 (twenty-one years ago)

pardon my ignorance (and devils' advocation) but if it is so cruel and inhumane then why are the practitioners so adamant that it is not as long as it's done right? why is their argument not convincing? and what are the best alternative ways to handle the process?

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:53 (twenty-one years ago)

The Humanists movement, which has previously called for the abolition of ritual slaughter, said ethical values should be put above religious ones.

It seems very very wrong to me to start telling people that their religious views are unethical. I know it's a grey area to say the least, but when you start drawing lines, where do you stop?

― ailsa (ailsa), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Matt's may be a more pertinent question but it is no less real ;)

my only answer is 'er, maybe they shouldn't take it so personal', soz

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:55 (twenty-one years ago)

It seems very very wrong to me to start telling people that their religious views are unethical.

not necessarily as a lot of so called religious views impede the rights of others (homosexuals etc.)

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:56 (twenty-one years ago)

(See also wearing of headscarves in French schools)

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:56 (twenty-one years ago)

What Matt DC said. Honestly, arguing for this is one of those things that makes me doubt the arguer's understanding of politics in a wider context than that of animal welfare.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:57 (twenty-one years ago)

The headscarves thing is just utterly, utterly STUPID.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I know, but as I said, where do you stop drawing lines?

(x-post with Ricky)

― ailsa (ailsa), Monday, 22 December 2003 16:58 (twenty-one years ago)

My over exposure to evangelical xtians recently has brought me round to the belief that all religion should take place in the home and in the home only, if at all.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:00 (twenty-one years ago)

where do you stop drawing lines?

you aim to stop when all parties are represented as fairly and as humanely as is feasible in accordance with common decency - this can even include the treatment of animals and i think it should.

i hope someone can answer my side questions above meanwhile.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:00 (twenty-one years ago)

http://info.ag.uidaho.edu/dairy/images/cows.jpg

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:01 (twenty-one years ago)

what did your mom say, Aja?

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Ed, surely you are not against churches, mosques, synagogues etc. also? ;)

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Common decency is slightly hairy beast to bring to the table. Whose common decency are referring to?

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I haven't been at work for a few days if I had I'd have probably been screaming for the children of the religious to be taken into care. (google matt jack and kidz 4 kidz)

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:02 (twenty-one years ago)

not necessarily as a lot of so called religious views impede the rights of others (homosexuals etc.)

how do "views" impede rights?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Ask Rev Jimmy Fallon

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:04 (twenty-one years ago)

pluralism is such a hassle.

― g--ff (gcannon), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:04 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,974880,00.html responds to the FAWC press release that that BBC article repeats. NOTE LEAVE YOUR PRE-CONCEPTIONS AT THE DOOR ;-)

The claim that the animals suffer is not a given, the process of making meat kosher is quite adamant that the animal should be killed as painlessly as possible (obv within the restraints of what makes something kosher).

― Jaunty Alan (Alan), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:04 (twenty-one years ago)

what did your mom say, Aja?

About what?

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Ed, do you believe that now is a very good time for the government to go telling Muslims that halal butchery is a bad thing and that they are going to make it illegal?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:05 (twenty-one years ago)

posting humongous pics on threads, but I guess that wasn't huge! Just teasing a bit. :)

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Matt, no, but in the grand scheme of things coming home from work is making me want to get all Mao Tse Tung on G1lbert Deya and B3nny Hinn's arses.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:07 (twenty-one years ago)

Brian Klug seems like a very sensible man indeed.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Haha! (yeah, whatever teeny)

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:08 (twenty-one years ago)

common decency means whatever you think it means (we would probably agree)

in the eyes of most Jews and Muslims this whole business may be the equivalent of if they were to try and stop Christians eating pork.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:09 (twenty-one years ago)

longer, more "neutral" article: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/foodmonthly/story/0,9950,1041058,00.html (Decca @itkenhe@d not my fave writer, but it's an ok article)

― Jaunty Alan (Alan), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

I like pork.

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

...

― fiddo centington (dubplatestyle), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Huh?

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)

What?

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:13 (twenty-one years ago)

What fiddo put.

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:14 (twenty-one years ago)

Also, the fundamental lie at the heart of this debate is that the alternative, Western method of slaughter is in any way more humane, as if its no more painful for the animal than the vet putting your pet rabbit down or something.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:15 (twenty-one years ago)

more : http://www.azhar.jp/info/halal-eng/halal5.html

There should be full recognition of the psychological needs; animals should not be slaughtered in front of others nor should the knife be sharpened before them; the baby should not be forcibly removed from the mother.

The welfare of the animals must come first, before monetary profit.

It is forbidden in Islam, to kill an animal in a cruel way or for pleasure, to use an animal as a target, to cut a part of it whilst still alive or finally, to set animals fighting against each other.

The above points are why Islam is against the following: battery cage (factory farming), fox hunting, bull fighting, cock fighting, dog fighting, using the animals for targets, culling seals, killing frogs, caging the animal, most vivisection. the abuse of drugs in animals and the interference with their organs sexuality [castration, sterility etc.(reproduction)]

― Jaunty Alan (Alan), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:16 (twenty-one years ago)

never thought i'd say this but i'd like to hear from c-man on this matter

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:16 (twenty-one years ago)

thanks Alan for all the article links, v informative

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, please not Calum!

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:17 (twenty-one years ago)

but this thread was for him!

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

from one of Ed's suggested google links:

Spiritual Safety Tip: What should you do if you find an Atheist?

If you find an Atheist in your neighborhood,
TELL A PARENT OR PASTOR RIGHT AWAY!

You may be moved to try and witness to
these poor lost souls yourself, however
AVOID TALKING TO THEM!

Atheists are often very grumpy and bitter and will lash out at children or they may even try to trick you into neglecting God's Word.

Very advanced witnessing techniques are needed for these grouches. Let the adults handle them.

― Catty (Catty), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)

but this thread was for him!

Well he used the other one already.

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Now, I haven't been paying full attention here, but I thought C****m was vegetarian and against animal slaughter in general - which is pretty much the only way you can avoid coming over like a total hypocrite in this debate IMO.

Earlier today I made myself a bacon sandwich, so can't claim to subscribe to this view.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:23 (twenty-one years ago)

do you believe that now is a very good time for the government to go telling Muslims that halal butchery is a bad thing and that they are going to make it illegal?

If they were singled out? No.

If halal, kosher, factory farming, and other forms of inhumane animal slaughter were also outlawed? Yes.

But maybe I'm just particularly unsympathetic to the Muslim viewpoint because I find it sexist. But then again I'm unsympathetic to most major religions because I think organized relgion is bullshit.

― Catty (Catty), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:24 (twenty-one years ago)

http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html is hilarious

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:26 (twenty-one years ago)

It seems very very wrong to me to start telling people that their religious views are unethical. I know it's a grey area to say the least, but when you start drawing lines, where do you stop?

-- ailsa (ailsa_watson7...), December 22nd, 2003.

Well that's just silly. If we agreed with this then we'd still have witch trials as no one would have protested and we'd all agree that stoning women in Saudi Arabia for adultery is "actually, alright when you consider the beliefs over there".

No, kosher meat is WRONG WRONG WRONG. I think animal welfare is a very serious issue, I don't want to see kosher meat banned because I want to piss of Muslim and Jewish people, I want to see it banned because an animal is hung upside down and has its throat slit while conscious as the end of a very shitty miserable life. Usually while other animals watch on in horror.

Again, I refer you to "Animal Welfare" by Peter Singer, who devotes some time to the practice of kosher meat. Sure, factory farming is disgusting and blah blah blah - but I know that stunning an animal before death is a fuck of a lot more humane than how it is done via ritual slaughter.

As a question - how many here have seen kosher footage and compared it to stunning and then killing footage? I promise, the difference is really quite horrifying.

BAN BAN BAN BAN.

P.S. I never made it as a veggie, I still eat chicken. Free range if possible. Sorry to disappoint. I also don't buy or wear anything tested on animals. I donate to animal charities. I've drawn my line.

― C-Man (C-Man), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:26 (twenty-one years ago)

re organised religion is bullshit: nonsense i went to two Catholic schools and it never did me any harm

at least none that i didn't deserve for being such a wretched deviant. oh yes.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:27 (twenty-one years ago)

Skipping 19 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

There is probably no truly humane way of killing an animal.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, not any that keeps the meat fit for human consumption.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:45 (twenty-one years ago)

What about petting the animal to death?

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:45 (twenty-one years ago)

No jump on it and suffacate it.

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, not any that keeps the meat fit for human consumption

not any that cuts their life short of their natural expectancy, really.

xpost

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:47 (twenty-one years ago)

maybe you can teach them to smoke and then eat them when they die of lung cancer.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, I was thinking you could give it a whopping dose of anaesthetic. That'd be pretty humane.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Until you kill it.

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:49 (twenty-one years ago)

look people the word is HUMANe...fuck the little four legged bastards.

― fiddo centington (dubplatestyle), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, er, we are talking abt humane killing here. I mean, if it didn't die then it'd be a bit rub.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:51 (twenty-one years ago)

killing != inhumanity

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Why not?

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Of course, we could give it a dose of anaesthetic, remove most of its brain, then keep it alive in a comatose state while we knawed the flesh from its still living legs.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

ricky did you mean anaesthetising them and THEN slitting the throats? i suspect stunning is more economical. i also suspect kosher and halal practitioners are opposed to 'tainting' the meat with drugs at any point during the process.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:53 (twenty-one years ago)

humanity has got killing down to a fine art

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:53 (twenty-one years ago)

NA - because euthanasia is arguably humane at least, for starters

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:54 (twenty-one years ago)

electrodes.

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:54 (twenty-one years ago)

No, anaesthetised animals would produce meat with some rather interesting properties. I was suggesting it as an example of killing that was humane, but wouldn't produce anything worthwhile, so as to counter Ken's point.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Over feed them and have them die of obesity.

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

If you're being severly literalistic, then killing != inhumane, because to kill is human, I guess. But in the sense that 'inhumane' = 'cruel,' then how does killing != inhumane?

― NA (Nick A.), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

How long does it take for an animal to die after you slit its throat? I mean, it can't be THAT long, surely?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:55 (twenty-one years ago)

if to kill is human then what is divine?

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

mixing up erring and killing is one of my worst habits.

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:57 (twenty-one years ago)

NA i was saying killing isn't ALWAYS inhumane/cruel because i am of the persuasion that it is better to have your life terminated should you wish then to spend a lengthy amount of time in abject pain and misery during it i.e. euthanasia is the lesser of two very unfortunate situations.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Jewish people believe that kosher meat insures that the animal died painlessly and that the meat is pure, for the most part. It's supposed to be out of respect for the animals, hence the whole not mixing milk with meat thing.

― Jordan (Jordan), Monday, 22 December 2003 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

right Jordan - do you think anti-kosher people do not believe that more because it's so messy visually?

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Hmm, read the link I posted and watch the footage and make up your own mind.

― C-Man (C-Man), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Brigitte Bardot to thread.

― andy, Monday, 22 December 2003 18:02 (twenty-one years ago)

How can it be painless?! How can you even think it's painless?!

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:03 (twenty-one years ago)

like i said Aja, an awful lot of people seem to be convinced that it IS indeed quick and painless. maybe the footage is just a VERY BAD EXAMPLE. perhaps there are too many practitioners not trained well enough to do it properly or perhaps are not made to care enough about it? this sounds like the kind of thing the campaigners should be concentrating on rather than the abolition of the method full stop. then again, maybe it is all a big lie...

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:04 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm less fussed about kosher and halal slaughter than I am about battery farming. A whole lot less divisive to sort out as well.

― Ed (dali), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

How can hanging a live animal upside down and then slitting its throat be "painless"? Now, stunning the beast first and then doing it - I can perhaps swallow that more easily... but every footage I've seen of kosher meat shows the great creature kicking and gasping and in pretty fucking evident fright and agony.

― C-Man (C-Man), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:07 (twenty-one years ago)

too many practitioners not trained well enough to do it properly or perhaps are not made to care enough about it?

Having read Calum's links this seems to be MUCH more problematic than the practice itself.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:09 (twenty-one years ago)

granted the discomfort endured whilst hanging upside down is probably negated in the argument a lot as people tend to concentrate on the bloodshed aspect...

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.michaelgier.com/cow2.jpg

OH GOD!!!!!!!

― Aja (aja), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

they don't always stun them right on factory farms. sometimes they miss altogether and a live, un-stunned cow goes thru an assembly-line of torture. sometimes they are still alive even after they cut their legs off. most halal and kosher butchers are highly trained. You can't say the same for shift-workers in a slaughterhouse. in fact, you should all read the book Slaughterhouse.

― scott seward (scott seward), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:22 (twenty-one years ago)

that picture would be funnier if it said 'ACTUAL FOOTAGE' - ouch

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 22 December 2003 18:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Scott, I'm well aware of that book - but regardless, what you are forgetting is that there is still a LAW with slaughterhouses (albeit one that may be abused, but as long as factory farming continues and people want supermarkets stocked to the hilt with cheap meat all you can do is make your feelings aware) wheras kosher meat produce states the animal must be conscious at the time of having its throat cut.

I think banning kosher meat is a start, at least a way of saying, "no animals have the right to be killed in a humane manner" - research into the produce of kosher meat has consistently shown that the animals suffer greatly.

― C-Man (C-Man), Monday, 22 December 2003 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm surprised Calum doesn't go after cheetahs for failing to administer anaesthesia before ripping the legs off their kill.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 00:15 (twenty-one years ago)

To the extent that you think domesticated animals raised solely to feed us have rights, shouldn't the quality of these animals' LIVES be more important than the quality of their DEATHS? In other words, Ed otm.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 00:21 (twenty-one years ago)

In case any of you are concerned, I attempted to stun this thread before killing it.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 01:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Tracer - if you accept that humans are different from animals then it's not the same as a cheetah killing its prey at all. The stupidest arguement from the non-animal welfare people is always that one.

― C-Man (C-Man), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 02:26 (twenty-one years ago)

It's the same to the prey, though.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 02:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I mean I assume that's who/what you're concerned with?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 23 December 2003 02:39 (twenty-one years ago)

No - I'm concerned that you think that by saying "yeah, well cheetahs kill their prey in nasty ways therefore I justify human beings slitting the throats of conscious cows" you're equating human beings with an animal such as a cheetah, when (duh) we have something called a conscience, humanity, feelings of guilt, empathy etc etc - that's what makes us more evolved.

― C-Man (C-Man), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 01:17 (twenty-one years ago)

SPICY CHICKEN, BITCH!!

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 01:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I had bbq for dinner.

― Aja (aja), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 01:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Human law makes no distinction between killing another human "painlessly" and murdering them in a far slower, more bloody and gory manner. The person gets killed whatever happens.

Likewise, the animal DIES whatever happens. Furthermore, it dies after an entire life of being prepared for nothing other than its killing and eating. Arguably, if it hadn't been for the desire of humankind to kill and eat it, the animal would not have existed in the first place.

Either come out and say that you are against all animals being killed in all circumstances or forget it, as far as I'm concerned.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 01:37 (twenty-one years ago)

To be honest, though, I don't particularly care about animal welfare. I mean, I don't want to see them suffer unnecessarily, but its not enough to wrench me from my current carnivorous state. I am more concerned with humans - I'm sure a load of animals died painfully and unnecessarily during the bombing of Iraq and Afghanistan, but, like, who gives a shit up against the backdrop of all that human suffering?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 01:40 (twenty-one years ago)

I couldn't care less what you think, Calum. But it's too much fun winding you up! (duh)

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 24 December 2003 02:11 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.

kosher and halal meat - c/d?