Why doesnt the RSPCA end Halal/ kosher meat slaughter?

245

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    codeblue wrote: »
    If i killed a pet by slitting its throat and letting it bleed to death, i would be in court on grounds of animal cruelty.

    If i dispatched, say, a pet dog quickly and painlessly, via a bolt to the head, i would not be in court.

    Are you a vet?

    Try putting your pet calf in your wheelie bin, see what happens.
  • sutiesutie Posts: 32,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How could they do that? So far as I know it is legal as long as it is done according to correct procedure. Like kosher meat for the Jews what is needed is for the deed to be done as humanely as possible and still fulfil the religious requirements, I am not a Muslim or a Jew but believe religious freedom is necessary for us all just like freedom of speech is. It allows individuals and groups freedoms that otherwise would be controlled by the state. How long (I ask myself) would it be before we had a dictatorial form of government if we lost the three fundamentals of freedom of speech, belief and action, which we presently enjoy here in the UK. :rolleyes:



    I have always struggled with the concept of deliberately employing a particularly barbaric method of slaughter in the name of religion.

    Madness, that sadly is allowed to continue in the twenty first century largely unopposed. :(
  • riceutenriceuten Posts: 5,876
    Forum Member
    codeblue wrote: »
    If you cut the throat of your pet and let it bleed to death, you would be up in court (rightly so).

    And yet everyday in the slaughterhouses of the UK this happens.

    Why are the RSPCA doing absolutely nothing about it - where are the arrests?

    Because blasting the brains out with a gun is no more humane. And quite a lot - though not all - of opposition to it is based on prejudice rather than any actual concern for animal rights.
  • gocompletelynutgocompletelynut Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I understand some top Islamic clerics have suggested stunning is acceptable, so long as the stunning does not kill the beast, in which case it would be haram.

    How very liberal of them :rolleyes:
  • VoynichVoynich Posts: 14,481
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    codeblue wrote: »
    If i killed a pet by slitting its throat and letting it bleed to death, i would be in court on grounds of animal cruelty.

    If i dispatched, say, a pet dog quickly and painlessly, via a bolt to the head, i would not be in court.

    Wtf!?
  • codebluecodeblue Posts: 14,072
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    riceuten wrote: »
    Because blasting the brains out with a gun is no more humane. And quite a lot - though not all - of opposition to it is based on prejudice rather than any actual concern for animal rights.

    Prejudice of what?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    People should be more worried about why the cow magically becomes a horse after it's legally slaughtered.
  • AdsAds Posts: 37,056
    Forum Member
    -Sid- wrote: »
    How quickly the debate took Kosher slaughter out of the equation and turned it's attention exclusively to Islam/Muslims.

    In actual fact, no Kosher meat is processed in the UK from animals stunned prior to slaughter whereas the vast majority (approx. 85%) of Halal slaughter is pre-stunned:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18187137

    So what's the reasoning behind the reluctance to tackle Kosher slaughter? Does it make the indigenous population feel less racist too?

    Also, preventing animal cruelty goes far beyond the debate about stunning or not stunning. Why don't people kick up as much of a fuss about the appalling conditions some animals are raised in, even before they reach the slaughterhouse?

    Your post is a bit misleading really, just because one clown goes on an anti Muslim rant, it doesn't mean that most people are not equally appalled by kosher and halal slaughter if it is un stunned.

    I agree about the poor conditions some animals are raised in - although British farms tend to be a lot better than many abroad. I always try and buy free range or organic though.
  • riceutenriceuten Posts: 5,876
    Forum Member
    In case you hadn't noticed OP Islam must always trump the indigenous people's way of life.

    Yes, I've noticed the complete lack of bacon in our local Co-Op, given that a mosque is less than 100 yards away...NOT.
    IIt makes the indigenous people feel less racist if they allow this to happen, even if it flies in the face of everything they truly believe in. There is your answer succinctly put.

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...
  • AdsAds Posts: 37,056
    Forum Member
    riceuten wrote: »
    Because blasting the brains out with a gun is no more humane. And quite a lot - though not all - of opposition to it is based on prejudice rather than any actual concern for animal rights.

    So an instant death via a bolt to the head is preferable to having your throat slit and bleeding to death? Only in your world, but not the real world.
  • gocompletelynutgocompletelynut Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    riceuten wrote: »
    quite a lot - though not all - of opposition to it is based on prejudice rather than any actual concern for animal rights.

    This is one of those people I mentioned in my opening post. His non opposition to halal slaughter gives him a nice fuzzy glow inside.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 22,736
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How very liberal of them :rolleyes:

    Well instead of roll eyes, we should be encouraging such opinions.
  • batgirlbatgirl Posts: 42,248
    Forum Member
    NatoPMT wrote: »
    "And, according to an RSPCA fact sheet, 90% of animals killed for halal food in 2004 were stunned first."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/sep/20/halal-meat-the-truth

    So why bother with a loophole for the 10% of what is already a tiny minority? :confused:
  • -Sid--Sid- Posts: 29,365
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How much of a fuss have you kicked up?

    Not much, but then I don't feel that strongly about this issue or I'd have turned veggie. I'll eat Halal or Kosher meat too, even if it means eating meat from animals that weren't stunned prior to slaughter.
  • AdsAds Posts: 37,056
    Forum Member
    batgirl wrote: »
    So why bother with the loophole for the 10% of what is already a tiny minority? :confused:

    Especially as another poster has told us its perfectly ok to stun the animal first and still cll it halal. If the Jews don't allow pre stunning in kosher then tough - they can either buy per stunned meat only or go vegetarian.
  • codebluecodeblue Posts: 14,072
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Voynich wrote: »
    Wtf!?

    It is not against the law to kill animals (that are not protected in law) in the uk, as long as you do it without causing unnecessary suffering.

    (i have not done so by the way)
  • sutiesutie Posts: 32,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    riceuten wrote: »
    Because blasting the brains out with a gun is no more humane. And quite a lot - though not all - of opposition to it is based on prejudice rather than any actual concern for animal rights.



    Stated as fact, when in actuality it is merely your own unproven opinion.
  • exlordlucanexlordlucan Posts: 35,375
    Forum Member
    Are you a vet?

    Try putting your pet calf in your wheelie bin, see what happens.

    Problems closing the lid?
  • 2+2=52+2=5 Posts: 24,264
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Recently there's evidence of at least 90% of Halal meat being prepared where the animal is stunned prior to the slitting of the throat. Pre-stunning is how a lot of (most) of the mainstream meat is prepared. So that the animal has less to no chance of feeling the pain. So if you want to ban Halal meat, you may need to ban all meat.

    These days there are a lot of ways for intolerant attitudes towards religious people or minorities to take place. Some of this has increased due to economic struggles and people seeking someone or something to blame. I have little time for such attitudes and most people do as well, I think. However I do respect people who have concerns about the health/condition of the animal as this is at least an endearing human trait (unlike the intolerance towards other humans just because they are different). I hope there's eventually a point of balance where animals are killed in as painless a way as possible that meets the criteria of both animal health supporters and religious people.
  • 2+2=52+2=5 Posts: 24,264
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well instead of roll eyes, we should be encouraging such opinions.

    That's what I think most right minded and open minded people would want to do. I don't believe everyone that lives in this country is right minded or open minded.
  • -Sid--Sid- Posts: 29,365
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ads wrote: »
    Your post is a bit misleading really, just because one clown goes on an anti Muslim rant, it doesn't mean that most people are not equally appalled by kosher and halal slaughter if it is un stunned.

    I agree about the poor conditions some animals are raised in - although British farms tend to be a lot better than many abroad. I always try and buy free range or organic though.

    It wasn't that misleading really because I was replying directly to that clown :D
  • batgirlbatgirl Posts: 42,248
    Forum Member
    Ads wrote: »
    Especially as another poster has told us its perfectly ok to stun the animal first and still cll it halal. If the Jews don't allow pre stunning in kosher then tough - they can either buy per stunned meat only or go vegetarian.

    Absolutely. If that small % of an already small % think their god needs the animals to fully experience the slaughter otherwise the meat is off limits then don't eat meat. It's not the biggest ask as far as getting into heaven, surely.
  • VoynichVoynich Posts: 14,481
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    That article is saying it's not just Halal/kosher that aren't being pre-stunned. That's when they're not substituting horse I suppose.
  • SpamJavelinSpamJavelin Posts: 1,071
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The RSPCA won't end ritual slaughter because it would mean taking on the religious lobby which, though numerically all but insiginificant, wields a wholly disproportionate amount of influence such that religious "rights" - the right to kill an animal in ways which without a religious dimension would earn prosecution, or the right to maim infants without anaesthetic - are deemed to override the other laws of the land.

    That's about it, really.
  • 2+2=52+2=5 Posts: 24,264
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Voynich wrote: »
    That article is saying it's not just Halal/kosher that aren't being pre-stunned. That's when they're not substituting horse I suppose.

    It's a highly relevant point - but do you think it would garner much of a debate amongst those with a chip on their shoulder about religions and the "shadowy" power they wield? The answer is, quite clearly no.
Sign In or Register to comment.