[Closed] End Halal petition

There is also a non-negligible risk, in my opinion that banning religious slaughter will drive it underground and make it even harder to regulate effectively, and again if welfare is a concern that would be a big step backwards, surely.

That took six pages too long to be mentioned.

If the UK were to ban Halal slaughter, do you think the Muslims who have been following their religion for millennia will a) go "right you are then chief, fair enough," or b) continue as they always have only in illegal, unregulated abattoirs?

The solution, fairly self-evidently, isn't to ban anything. Rather we need to have a method of slaughter which both meets UK / EU standards and satisfies their requirements. And, critically, bloody well enforce it properly.

Halal slaughter isn't intended to be cruel, quite the opposite. "Use your sharpest knife" is as opposed to bludgeoning the poor bugger to death with sticks. At the time it was probably the best, most humane method. Time and technology have moved on since then but religion generally and Islam particularly is very resistant to change. Nonetheless, (most) Muslims and non-Muslims alike equally want to reduce suffering. This shouldn't be a big ask.

Fixed it for you, simples. Now, about that World Peace...

Excellent! Time for the End Halal Petition Petition?

Cougar - Moderator

If the UK were to ban Halal slaughter, do you think the Muslims who have been following their religion for millennia will a) go "right you are then chief, fair enough," or b) continue as they always have only in illegal, unregulated abattoirs?

The threat of people breaking laws shouldn't be the determining factor as to whether or not laws should be made or amended.

Halal slaughter isn't intended to be cruel, quite the opposite. "Use your sharpest knife" is as opposed to bludgeoning the poor bugger to death with sticks. At the time it was probably the best, most humane method. Time and technology have moved on since then but religion generally and Islam particularly is very resistant to change. Nonetheless, (most) Muslims and non-Muslims alike equally want to reduce suffering. This shouldn't be a big ask.

Unfortunately it is a big ask because as you point out Islam is extremely resistant to change and halal slaughter seems to rule out stunning and therefore it's less likely to be as humane even in ideal circumstances.

Even in terms of basic practicalities ask yourself which is likely to be safer, more efficient and less likely to produce mistakes -

a) someone places a pole or gun shaped object on an animals skull and pulls the trigger while a queue of live animals filter through a crush or

b) someone (who has to be a muslim or a jew) prays over a razor sharp sword which he must place under the neck of a live animal which is in a queue of animals in a crush and administer a clean cut right the way through the neck?

The threat of people breaking laws shouldn't be the determining factor as to whether or not laws should be made or amended.

I didn't say it did. Rather I was positing that the efficacy of such a ban would be between "slim" and "none." Prohibition has proven time and again just how well it works.

Regardless of people breaking laws or not, should we not take into account whether a change to the law is likely to make a situation better or worse?

halal slaughter [b]seems to[/b] rule out stunning

"Seems to"? It either does or it doesn't. A quick Google would suggest that 84% of Halal slaughter in the UK is performed on pre-stunned animals, so it would "seem to" be the latter to me. We just need to work on that other 16%.

Even in terms of basic practicalities ask yourself which is likely to be safer, more efficient and less likely to produce mistakes -

Search me, I've never tried it. The weak link in both of those cases is "people," to which the answer is "regulation and training" is it not?

someone (who has to be a muslim or a jew) prays over a razor sharp sword

I'm not seeing how praying makes the job any more risky, and as far as I know it's a knife not a sword. Nice emotive use of hyperbole, though.

Interesting that you should mention the Jewish though. The Jewish method of "shechita" expressly prohibits pre-stunning. Maybe we should ban that instead.

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/may/08/what-does-halal-method-animal-slaughter-involve ]Sauce[/url] (among others).

ask yourself which is likely to be safer, more efficient and less likely to produce mistakes -

IMHO meat eaters want to be able to say they are doing it as nicely as possible - and certainly they are not doing it as horribly as possible - but you cannot mass slaughter millions of animals every day and think it was all done humanely

*Electrical stunning
Birds are hung upside down by their legs on metal shackles along a moving conveyor belt.
They move along the production line to a stunning water bath; when the bird’s head makes contact with the water, an electrical circuit between the water bath and shackle is completed, which stuns the bird.
The conveyor belt then moves the birds to a mechanical neck cutter, which cuts the major blood vessels in the neck.

TBh not only do they not all end up stunned they dont all even end up dead after the neck cutter. Halal does at least lead to death 100% of the time

I didn't say it did. Rather I was positing that the efficacy of such a ban would be between "slim" and "none." Prohibition has proven time and again just how well it works.

Prohibition of drugs and alcohol isn't the same. Remember we are talking about the suffering of an animal here, not the needs of the consumer. Furthermore during prohibition of drugs and alcohol there weren't fully legal completely identical products available everywhere. All that would happen is that the market for kosher and halal meats would be flooded with non kosher non halal meat masquerading as kosher and hala because we know it's 100% identical and it's impossible to tell the difference.

"Seems to"? It either does or it doesn't. A quick Google would suggest that 84% of Halal slaughter in the UK is performed on pre-stunned animals, so it would "seem to" be the latter to me. We just need to work on that other 16%.

A quick google also suggests that religious slaughter is legally exempt from stunning and that from what I can tell the percentage of animals stunned, the method of stunning and the effectiveness of the stunning is open to interpretation.

Search me, I've never tried it. The weak link in both of those cases is "people," to which the answer is "regulation and training."

Imagine trying it. Which do you think is the more difficult and involving process? According to the RSPCA

"The level of restraint of conscious animals required for slaughter without pre-stunning was far greater than for conventional slaughter.

A large cut made across the neck of a conscious animal would “result in very significant pain and distress” before the animal loses consciousness (around 5 to 7 seconds for sheep, 22 to 40 seconds for adult cattle).

So it's fairly obvious which is more difficult.

I'm not seeing how praying makes the job any more risky, and as far as I know it's a knife not a sword. Nice emotive use of hyperbole, though.

You should probably go to your local slaughterhouse and get a feel for the process and understand the kind of environments in which these tasks are being carried out. A crush full of large animals braying and jostling with a floor covered in blood and shit isn't really an ideal environment for complacency or prayer and when I saw halal slaughter the kill operator used a sword which he kept in it's own fancy case and everything.

A crush full of large animals braying and jostling with a floor covered in blood and shit isn't really an ideal environment for complacency or prayer

All halal and kosher should be pre-stunned without exception. Anything less is medieval and backward.

[url= https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=94c_1443785485 ]Warning - graphic halal slaughter[/url]

meh

either your a vegetarian or you're not.. don't try and run from your guilt

(I'm not)

All halal and kosher should be pre-stunned without exception. Anything less is medieval and backward.

Of all the things to worry about in the meat supply chain, it's a long way down the list.

Warning - graphic halal slaughter

Yeah, it's pretty sick...and this is being done in the name of a belief system, religion of peace and all that...

There is nothing wrong with looking for the definitive standardized most humane method of slaughter and then implementing that across the board...religion should play no part in it.

Some people on here are of the view that the animal is for slaughter anyway so what does it matter how it's killed!?..really?!...let's all entertain ourselves with some bull fighting first because you know, the bull will end up dead and on a plate anyway so what does it matter how it ended up there...or perhaps some cockfighting before Sunday roast chicken?!...

...maybe just bring back fox hunting because farmers are shooting the foxes with rifles and they end up dead anyway so let's just allow horses and hounds to chase them first and tear them to pieces?!....in fact with fox hunting being rooted in history and tradition it has about as much legitimacy as the tradition of Halal slaughter.

It's brutal, granted, but in that camel vid they seem to lose blood pressure incredibly quickly! With a knife as sharp as theirs, I'd actually question how much suffering is involved.
My (probably naive ) hunch is that they would feel pain fleetingly, quickly be flooded with adrenaline and then experience some kind of euphoria as they became oxygen depleted.

I mean, if that's bollocks then brill, lets ban it but just because it's a bit gory doesn't mean it's necessarily bad?

Did I miss a link to some science? Is it bad?

There is nothing wrong with looking for the definitive standardized most humane method of slaughter

Some people on here are of the view that the animal is for slaughter anyway so what does it matter how it's killed!

Both are shitty cruel methods I am not sure what sense of moral well being you gain from yours being marginally less brutal and shitty than the other method - lets not discuss chickens though where there is nicer and more effective.

There's nothing magic at all, bolt stunning is humane compared to bleeding to death. This is neither a minor nor a marginal point.

What if they were stunned then bled to death?

Out of interest a muslim friend of mine holds the opinion that anything reared industrially can't be halal no matter how it's killed.

There's nothing magic at all, bolt stunning is humane compared to bleeding to death. This is neither a minor nor a marginal point.

Have we done this yet? If not, why not, it might be the answer? 🙂

.in fact with fox hunting being rooted in history and tradition it has about as much legitimacy as the tradition of Halal slaughter.

Except with halal the animals aren't chased for miles till exhaustion then ripped to bits.
Love to see those redcoats running for their lives.

What if they were stunned then bled to death?

Well of course, its infinitely more humane to the animal.

The vast majority of meat that gets killed has had a pretty shite life up to there, lasting several months.

Farmers would wholeheartedly disagree.

Factory-farmers would wholeheartedly disagree.

ftfy

And - no shit, Sherlock? The vast majority of dairy and meat is factory-farmed.

This has turned to a halal of a thread.

What do you call a camel with three humps?

Humphrey!

Are the meat eaters among us prepared to pay more to make standards better?

Consumers can usually solve problems if they're bothered enough.

Same with sweat-shop labour. Almost back-round noise now as long as we're getting our cheap crap.

Are the meat eaters among us prepared to pay more to make standards better?

Not me! I'd pay a bit more for GM research into better productivity. In fact I even part funded the kick starter campaign for the GM chickens

Are the meat eaters among us prepared to pay more to make standards better?

We do pay more. Pre-stunned is generally more expensive than halal meat, eg cheap lamb from your local turkish food shop. There's no change needed for the general populous other than outlawing medieval slaughter methods. There are no barriers other than islamic and jewish sentiment.

We do pay more. Pre-stunned is generally more expensive than halal meat, eg cheap lamb from your local turkish food shop. There's no change needed for the general populous other than outlawing medieval slaughter methods. There are no barriers other than islamic sentiment.

For the umpteenth time, most Halal meat is pre-stunned. The change for the general populace is an acknowledgement that minimum standards of livestock welfare in this country are not all that great.

Are the meat eaters among us prepared to pay more to make standards better?

Already been asked and answered but yes I would/do it is actually available already. If it becomes more readily available the price might actually drop.

Fair enough, but I'm not sure this represents the populace at large.

I think the populace should be more concern about chicken that's been used to mop the floor...

Sadly that doesn't get round the abattoir issue.

Neither, sadly, does existing monitoring (including RSPCA approved in some cases)

[url= https://www.animalaid.org.uk/the-issues/our-campaigns/slaughter/animal-aid-statement-non-stun-slaughter/ ]This, IMO just about sums up most issues/questions raised by this thread/petition[/url]

Are the meat eaters among us prepared to pay more to make standards better?

I am a vegetarian but my dogs aren't. They get fed wild boar, pheasant, rabbit etc,. And no it isn't anyway as cheap as someone 99% of people buy from the supermarket.

I would put my money on people not really caring as long as the meat is cheap, which is why pretending to care about the last 10 minutes of the animals life seems very odd.

not really caring as long as the meat is cheap

don't forget tasty!

For the umpteenth time, most Halal meat is pre-stunned

Why not all, without exception?
Give me a valid reason against doing this?
Millions of animals are still bled to death without stunning every year in the UK and there is no justification for allowing this practice to continue.

Why not all, without exception?
Give me a valid reason against doing this?
Millions of animals are still bled to death without stunning every year in the UK and there is no justification for allowing this practice to continue.

Why are you asking me? I was simply pointing out the error in your post.

Millions of animals are still bled to death without stunning every year in the UK and there is no justification for allowing this practice to continue.

I'm not sure anyone is arguing that it should.
Some may be saying it is a trivial point in the grand scheme. But if the petition was asking for all animals to be stunned before being killed, by whatever means , then i think most folks here might be happier signing that

I think the populace should be more concern about chicken that's been used to mop the floor...

In the grand scale, I think that is a paltry concern

Why not all, without exception?

Everyone on here has agreed there should be no exception, some because of you know Muslims, others because it’s just not humane. Then there’s those that keeping telling us that animals should have a good life before being murdered but I don’t think anyone has said they shouldn’t.

In the grand scale, I think that is a paltry concern

NIce nugget of humour.

though to be honest, chasing rabbits with a hammer before shooting them is just exhausting!

NIce nugget of humour.

Deserves a pulletzer prize.

though to be honest, chasing rabbits with a hammer before shooting them is just exhausting!

Well if little Rabitt Foo Foo can manage with field mice I’m sure you can try harder.

Everyone on here has agreed there should be no exception

Incorrect.

You may be right to be honest I gave up on it when trolls started, I should have kept it that way.

Everyone on here has agreed there should be no exception

Seeing it is so humane at what age would you let a child watch it happen live? If you are uncomfortable with doing this ask yourself why.
Banning others form eating stuff is silly [ as is killing it in a slightly different way] - thought the vegans are the preachy ones - do what you can and leave others to do what they want.

Junkyard - lazarus

i have asked why this brief moment in a lifetime of cruelty is what tips you meat eaters over from happy to eat it into humanitarian concern for the slaughter victim.

Your making the assumption that just because someone cares about the method of slaughter they are unconcerned about the welfare of living animals. That's not the case. You're also making the assertion that all animals reared for food have miserable lives, also not the case.

Let me just check what level of misery the cattle in the field are being subjected to......well it's a bit windy and they have no jackets but apart from that and crushing boredom I'd say they are fine.

Seeing it is so humane at what age would you let a child watch it happen live? If you are uncomfortable with doing this ask yourself why.

My son has already seen lambs being born and chickens being slaughtered. He is three. I wouldn't have an issue with him seeing cattle being slaughtered other than the fact that the killing floor of a slaughterhouse is no place for a three year old.

I have not i have asked why this brief moment in a lifetime of cruelty is what tips you meat eaters over

I thought it would be evident that I wasn’t referring to veggies and vegans, let’s face it I didn’t need to specify that did I?

Tips us over to what?

Seeing it is so humane at what age would you let a child watch it happen live? If you are uncomfortable with doing this ask yourself why.

I think was about 7 or 8 my daughter watched it on YouTube when was around the same age.

She is against animal testing and has experessed her concerns of about eating meat, she has weighed up the rights and wrongs deciding she is comfortable with the fact that animals die to feed us. However, she does like me prefer them to have a better life first.

Banning others form eating stuff is silly [ as is killing it in a slightly different way] - thought the vegans are the preachy ones - do what you can and leave others to do what they want.

Where was I being preachy?

Preachy would be claiming there’s a tipping point.