Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
knocker

Animal welfare and slaughter methods

Recommended Posts

The recent debate in the Lords regarding the labelling of meat products has really raised two issues. The aforementioned one and also whether the method of killing animals should be dictated by religious principles. This of course refers to Halal and Kosher meat. Not all Muslim interpretations  require this.

 

Clearer labelling of meat should be introduced in Britain to help identify animals killed in accordance with religious slaughter, peers have argued.

 

During the fierce debate in the House of Lords, shechita was described as “barbaric†and “absolutely unacceptable†before Jewish peers rallied to defend the practice.

 

The animal welfare and slaughter methods debate, prompted by a question from veterinary professor Lord Trees, concentrated on “ethical, legal and religious factors†relating to pre-slaughter stunning and the labelling of the meat produced.

 

Animals used for kosher and halal meat are not stunned before slaughter

 

It's estimated ( a very rough estimation I feel ) that 70, 000 cattle 1.5 million sheep are killed without pre-stunning and at the moment a fair bit ends up on sale to the non Jewish and Muslim community.

 

So the two part question is, should we introduce food labelling and/or should we ban separate slaughter methods dictated by ethical, legal and religious factors?

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, ban it. When it comes to the welfare of living things religion should have no say whatsoever in a civilised society. The Swiss, if I'm not mistaken, banned it over 100 years ago.

The labelling of meat products would have dire consequences for the industry. I feel people would vote with their wallets and not buy Halal or Kosher meat in any near the same quantities as they do currently.

The majority of the UK population are not Muslim or Jewish, yet a disproportionally high amount of our meat is religiously slaughtered, why?

The slaughter methods in this country should be dictated entirely with what the scientific research states is best for the welfare of the animals.

It's about time we adopted a secular approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with MB's post above but just to touch on the other point of view.

 

The arguments that support non-stun

 

Throughout the debate, held on Thursday 17 January, most peers supported the labelling of religiously slaughtered animals – but some argued the practice was humane and could even be better for welfare than pre-stunning.

 

“Islam forbids the mistreatment of animals; the welfare of animals is enshrined in Muslim beliefs,†said Lord Sheikh, chairman of the Conservative Muslim Forum. “There has never been any conclusive scientific evidence to suggest that religious slaughter is less humane than conventional mechanical methods.â€

 

“In halal slaughter, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the immediate brain starvation of blood and oxygen.â€

 

Lord Sacks, who is chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, also argued that religious slaughter could be of higher welfare. “The animal must be killed by a single cut with an instrument of surgical sharpness, and in the absence of anything that might impede its smooth and swift motion,†he said. “The cut achieves three things: it stuns, kills and exsanguinates in a single act.â€

 

He added that pre-stunning often “fails at the first attemptâ€.

 

DEFRA under-secretary, Lord De Mauley, said the government was awaiting the results of an EU study into labelling meat from non-stunned animals. “We will look carefully at what options are available for providing information to consumers in the light of the study,†he added.

 

i find “Islam forbids the mistreatment of animals; the welfare of animals is enshrined in Muslim beliefs,†a bit odd.

 

During the celebration of Eid al-Adha, Muslims commemorate and remember Abraham's trials, by themselves slaughtering an animal such as a sheep, camel, or goat. Many thousands are slaughtered Surprise, surprise,this action is very often misunderstood by those outside the faith. 

Apparently the reasoning is Allah has given Muslims  power over animals and allowed them to eat meat, but only if they pronounce His name at the solemn act of taking life. Muslims slaughter animals in the same way throughout the year. By saying the name of Allah at the time of slaughter, they are reminded that life is sacred.

 

Surely we live in a secular society and our laws should be dictated by mumbo jumbo.

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a vegetarian of 21 years, I consider any kind of animal slaughter as wrong. In a civilised world, we do not need to eat dead carcasses to live. In the same way we do not need to wear fur. Primitive man, on the other hand had no other option.

However, if an animal has to be slaughtered, then it should be done as quickly and painlessly as possible. This country is NOT Muslim and therefore, we should slaughter the animals as we always have done. And with as little stress for the unfortunate animal.

As for living in a secular society.........it seems that we, in this country, are being dictated to by religions other than our own C of E. The spineless people in charge are, as ever, frightened that they may offend minority groups; but they couldn't care less about offending the majority.

We should ban halal in this country....it has NO place in a civilised society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a vegetarian of 21 years, I consider any kind of animal slaughter as wrong. In a civilised world, we do not need to eat dead carcasses to live. In the same way we do not need to wear fur. Primitive man, on the other hand had no other option.However, if an animal has to be slaughtered, then it should be done as quickly and painlessly as possible. This country is NOT Muslim and therefore, we should slaughter the animals as we always have done. And with as little stress for the unfortunate animal.As for living in a secular society.........it seems that we, in this country, are being dictated to by religions other than our own C of E. The spineless people in charge are, as ever, frightened that they may offend minority groups; but they couldn't care less about offending the majority.We should ban halal in this country....it has NO place in a civilised society.

 

Whilst I'm not a vegetarian I do agree - more people should take a stand as say enough is enough. I reckon the government and the public are scared of the repercussions from the muslims if we banned halal slaughter, and over the years we know this comes in many forms through intimidation and violence from the so called religion of peace.

Edited by Gaz1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion aside there should be a humane and uniformed method of slaughter IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion aside there should be a humane and uniformed method of slaughter IMHO.

 

Let's face it the words slaughter and humane don't really go together lol ....but I know what you mean - make it as quick and painless as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it the words slaughter and humane don't really go together lol ....but I know what you mean - make it as quick and painless as possible.

Yep. It's the archetypal oxymoron, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time that those who support religions learn to accept that laws were there for everyone to adhere to? Why do so many legal requirements carry a religious opt-out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religious animal slaughter change urged

 

The practice of slaughtering animals by slitting their throats and draining the blood in line with religious custom should be adapted to prevent suffering, the leader of Britain's vets has said.

John Blackwell, head of the British Veterinary Association, said animals should be "stunned" before slaughter.

The practice is traditional in Judaism and Islam.

Jonathan Arkush, from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said Mr Blackwell's comm

The practice of slaughtering animals by slitting their throats and draining the blood in line with religious custom should be adapted to prevent suffering, the leader of Britain's vets has said.

John Blackwell, head of the British Veterinary Association, said animals should be "stunned" before slaughter.

The practice is traditional in Judaism and Islam.

Jonathan Arkush, from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said Mr Blackwell's comments were "misleading".

Mr Blackwell told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that animals should be "stunned at the time of death", which would render them "insensible to pain until death supervenes".

"It's important at the time of death for the animals' welfare not to be compromised," he said, while adding that he "respected the beliefs of religious sects".

ents were "misleading".

Mr Blackwell told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that animals should be "stunned at the time of death", which would render them "insensible to pain until death supervenes".

"It's important at the time of death for the animals' welfare not to be compromised," he said, while adding that he "respected the beliefs of religious sects".

 

 

Full article here -> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26463064

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time that those who support religions learn to accept that laws were there for everyone to adhere to? Why do so many legal requirements carry a religious opt-out?

I've no beef (sorry!) with the religious, and their religious freedom should be respected so long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom, welfare or well being of other living things and people.When that line is crossed, as is the case with religious slaughter, it has every right to be scrutinised and, if needs be, challenged without sentiment.Perhaps the Danes have been brave enough to make the first move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else sigh when you have a representative of the Jewish or Muslim faith explaining how humane their slaughter methods are, despite having no real relevant knowledge and which often contradicts the opinions of top veterinarians?

It's also galling to hear of cries of "prejudice" and an intolerance of religious freedom, as if it should have automatic legal status regardless of the nature of the act.

By that token, the fact we don't allow people to be stoned to death is a sign of our prejudice and intolerance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...