Takeaways should say if their meat is halal, says campaigner (From Bournemouth Echo)

If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited.

The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit.

Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

jmd4eva wrote:
If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

Oh please. Many meat eaters have strong ethical views about the animals' husbandry and humane slaughter... I'm all in favour of a ban on Halal meat as it is not humane - and that's got nothing to do with race or religion.

In the meantime, anyone selling meat of any kind should have to be able to provide information detailing the living conditions of the animals and the means of their despatch on request.

Adrian XX wrote:
Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited.

The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit.

Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

This is factually incorrect. According to scientific studies (New Scientist, October 2009) the pain from the incision actually lasts for up to two minutes...

jmd4eva wrote:
If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

Exactly, well said. The only people who have a right to object to animal welfare and methods of slaughter are vegans. Anyone else is a hypocrite.

This is factually incorrect. According to scientific studies (New Scientist, October 2009) the pain from the incision actually lasts for up to two minutes...

The new scientist report makes some dubious inferences. Similar EEG signals do not indicate similar experiences. (The scientist in the report uses similar logic to 'I have blue eyes, I have a headache'. You have blue eyes, therefore you must have a headache too).

The report states 'Johnson developed a way of lightly anaesthetising animals so that although they experienced no pain, the same electrical pain signals could be reliably detected, showing they would have suffered pain if awake'

It's the 'showing they would have suffered pain if awake' step that is highly dubious. You could also say: perhaps the animals in the experiment DID feel pain even though lightly anaesthetised: they simply showed no reaction to it. (though of course, a pain-like reaction in itself is not evidence of pain: robots that looks surprisingly like real animals can make pain-like reactions).

“If the animal is stunned the blood has not come out and you are eating a dead animal . The blood should come out. "
This is nonsense - the stunned animal is hung up and then has its throat cut and the remaining power of the heart pumps out the most of the blood, then it hangs for a while and drips as viewing any slaughterhouse film reveals. Distressing as this may appear to some it is in fact how animals are killed for meat. Kosher and Halal are broadly similar in killing methodologies and are based on some obscure passages of religious texts.

How about the law stating that cafes and restaraunts have to state if meet IS halal, Mr. Hazel, since this only affects a very very very very small minority..........Th
is would make far more sense, would it not???? P.S. It doesn't help the animal, does it?

If they said it was Halal, would you take their word for it or spend time investigating if it actually is. If so, I bet it would've gone cold by the time you found out for sure.

CourtOffside wrote:

Adrian XX wrote: Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited. The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit. Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

This is factually incorrect. According to scientific studies (New Scientist, October 2009) the pain from the incision actually lasts for up to two minutes...

What is factually correct is you are boring be to death. RIP me.

Letcommonsenseprevai
l wrote:

CourtOffside wrote:

Adrian XX wrote: Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited. The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit. Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

This is factually incorrect. According to scientific studies (New Scientist, October 2009) the pain from the incision actually lasts for up to two minutes...

What is factually correct is you are boring be to death. RIP me.

So much in fact, it is affecting my spelling. I meant 'me to death'. God, I sound as boring as you now, AAARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!
!!!!!

Quote"Jewish and Muslim communities are exempt from a law that requires animals to be stunned before their throats are cut."

So as a christian or a catholic are we not entitled to know if the meat is Halal?

If I go to a supermarket i know where the Halal meat is and i have the choice of buying it or not. If in a takeaway why should I have to ask when it should be made clear and then I have the informed choice. I am in no doubt whilst crusading Gary was probably subject to racist comments from staff purely for asking the question.

This is a multi cultural society and therefore we should respect different religions and races etc but that also means them respecting our religions too.

jmd4eva wrote:
If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

Why does everything always get branded as "racist" these days?

I have both Jewish friends and Muslim neighbours and get on with them all very well - but I do not condone the way their religion controls how they slaughter their meat - that does not make me a racist - it means I am compassionate about animal husbandry - nothing more, nothing less.

The Oxford Dictionary states :

Definition of racism
noun

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races"


So how does not approving of how meat is killed mean I distinguish the people or their religion as superior or inferior?

I suspect you are yet another person using the race card, when they don't actually know what it means ........

If he feels so strongly about slaughter methods I would caution Mr Hazel from eating ANY meat abroad that has come from local farms. Many animals are slaughtered using this method as it is easier to recover the blood (for black pudding) and they are already hanging correctly for skinning. This practice is NOT reserved for Halal/Kosher and is still widely used on smallholdings across most of Europe and the rest of the world.

Morrigan wrote:

jmd4eva wrote:
If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

Why does everything always get branded as "racist" these days?

I have both Jewish friends and Muslim neighbours and get on with them all very well - but I do not condone the way their religion controls how they slaughter their meat - that does not make me a racist - it means I am compassionate about animal husbandry - nothing more, nothing less.

The Oxford Dictionary states :

Definition of racism
noun

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races"


So how does not approving of how meat is killed mean I distinguish the people or their religion as superior or inferior?

I suspect you are yet another person using the race card, when they don't actually know what it means ........

Spot on.

Yes I agree fully with all the comments made but my attitude and personal feelings are that this is Britain and let us get our own laws about food sorted before we start dealing with other races and religions food laws.

Adrian XX wrote:
Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited.

The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit.

Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

I have to say I have seen an animal killed the 'halal' way and it was not very nice and I would say the animal very much suffered - the screams (it was a goat) were certainly enough to suggest that.

Also, the campaign group Compassionate Dorset, the RSPCA and Compassion in World Farming are all against it on the grounds of cruelty.

That's probably enough evidence for me.

Though to be fair I also don't like animals or people suffering uncessarily on the grounds of religion (especially when there is no universal agreement) either.

Oh and one more thing death does definately not occur within a few seconds; 2 - 4 minutes is more accurate.

(Boring maybe but rather important when deciding in a debate on whether it is cruel or whether 'it matters').

scrumpyjack wrote:
Oh and one more thing death does definately not occur within a few seconds; 2 - 4 minutes is more accurate.

(Boring maybe but rather important when deciding in a debate on whether it is cruel or whether 'it matters').

Ill-informed claptrap.

The point everyone is overlooking is that the brain has a pressure control system. The brain is an extremely delicate organ with a lot of very fine blood vessels, and if any of those vessels rupture irreparable damage is likely to occur. Not surprisingly the body has evolved a spectacularly sensitive pressure control system to stop the brain being over or under supplied with blood. The main location of that pressure control system is within the carotid sinus.

In simplified terms if the area around the carotids experiences a blood pressure change the body initiates a fainting reaction. The body collapses to bring the heart and brain to the same level. That enables it to regian control of blood pressure to the brain. When an animal has its carotid severed the blood pressure decrease causes the animal faints, not within minutes but within seconds.

Anyone who has seen animals being dispatched in this way will confirm this.

mikey2gorgeous wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:
Oh and one more thing death does definately not occur within a few seconds; 2 - 4 minutes is more accurate.

(Boring maybe but rather important when deciding in a debate on whether it is cruel or whether 'it matters').

Ill-informed claptrap.

The point everyone is overlooking is that the brain has a pressure control system. The brain is an extremely delicate organ with a lot of very fine blood vessels, and if any of those vessels rupture irreparable damage is likely to occur. Not surprisingly the body has evolved a spectacularly sensitive pressure control system to stop the brain being over or under supplied with blood. The main location of that pressure control system is within the carotid sinus.

In simplified terms if the area around the carotids experiences a blood pressure change the body initiates a fainting reaction. The body collapses to bring the heart and brain to the same level. That enables it to regian control of blood pressure to the brain. When an animal has its carotid severed the blood pressure decrease causes the animal faints, not within minutes but within seconds.

Anyone who has seen animals being dispatched in this way will confirm this.

Uh oh.

Now Mikey, you made a mistake trying to ridicule people - it’s not nice to use terms such as 'ill informed' and 'clap trap'.

To then do a search on the internet and cut and paste SOMEONE ELSES contribution and pass it off as your own to try and big yourself up can come back and bite you and the bum.

If anyone is the slightest bit interested in where Mikey - he of the gorgeous kind - nicked his well-informed 'contribution' from here is the link.....

(it dates back to 2006 btw)

http://boards.straig
htdope.com/sdmb/arch
ive/index.php/t-3747
04.html

I don't care where the medical facts came from or that I didn't write the original article - they are still correct. You may comment on here for your own ego - don't accuse everyone else of that.

Your link has nothing to do with the question in hand or the text I copied.

Your assertion that the animal will suffer for 2-4 minutes is simply wrong.

You ARE ill-informed and your comments ARE claptrap. Would you prefer me to say you are making it up? Or that you're a liar? Let me know your preferred phrase - happy to oblige.

And please keep your comments to the point in hand. We're trying to have a decent debate here - not turn it into a slanging match.

“And please keep your comments to the point in hand. We're trying to have a decent debate here - not turn it into a slanging match.”

Errm so using phrases such as "You ARE ill-informed and your comments ARE claptrap" is not 'slanging match?'

You have cut and paste a POST from a 6 year web chat from god knows whom and yet have the audacity to declare it as "medical fact" and belittle others ‘lack of knowledge’.

You should have stopped when you were behind. You really should have.

We can all 'Google':

‘The Farm Animal Welfare Council says the way Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals’.

‘In 2003, Government advisory body the Farm Animal Welfare Council published a report declaring that the halal method of killing ‘would inevitably trigger a barrage of sensory information to the brain in a sensible (conscious) animal .  .  . such a massive injury would result in very significant pain and distress in the period before insensibility supervenes’.’

‘A spokeswoman for the RSPCA said: “The RSPCA recognises that religious practices should be respected, but we consider that scientific research has clearly demonstrated that slaughter of an ­animal without stunning can cause unnecessary suffering. This is not about religion, it’s about animal welfare.”’


I have, as mentioned, witnessed the method. As in 'me' - not some random post from a 6 year old forum.

I have slung my last slang to you about this. You have shown everyone what we need to know about you and your contribution to this debate. Now good day to you.

You claimed the animal would suffer for 2-4 minutes.

Your last post does nothing to back up that claim or refute what I have posted.

PLEASE tell us where you COPIED this (mis)information from?

Oh go away, you look a complete tool.

Ok just for you then I am off to the pub….


From the BBC news website:

FAWC said it wanted an end to the exemption currently allowed for Kosher and Halal meat from the legal requirement to stun animals first.

It says cattle can take up to two minutes to bleed to death - amounting to an abuse of the animals.

This is just one scientific report.


The goat I saw took more than 2 mins and screamed like a banshee.

This is just one eye witness report.


And if you read the BNP's 'experts' they claim it is more than 4 minutes.

(But god bless 'em I suspect they may have a hidden agenda so am wary of believing this as 'fact').

So, let's agree somewhere in the middle shall we? (that is rhetorical btw)

scrumpyjack wrote:

mikey2gorgeous wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:
Oh and one more thing death does definately not occur within a few seconds; 2 - 4 minutes is more accurate.

(Boring maybe but rather important when deciding in a debate on whether it is cruel or whether 'it matters').

Ill-informed claptrap.

The point everyone is overlooking is that the brain has a pressure control system. The brain is an extremely delicate organ with a lot of very fine blood vessels, and if any of those vessels rupture irreparable damage is likely to occur. Not surprisingly the body has evolved a spectacularly sensitive pressure control system to stop the brain being over or under supplied with blood. The main location of that pressure control system is within the carotid sinus.

In simplified terms if the area around the carotids experiences a blood pressure change the body initiates a fainting reaction. The body collapses to bring the heart and brain to the same level. That enables it to regian control of blood pressure to the brain. When an animal has its carotid severed the blood pressure decrease causes the animal faints, not within minutes but within seconds.

Anyone who has seen animals being dispatched in this way will confirm this.

Uh oh.

Now Mikey, you made a mistake trying to ridicule people - it’s not nice to use terms such as 'ill informed' and 'clap trap'.

To then do a search on the internet and cut and paste SOMEONE ELSES contribution and pass it off as your own to try and big yourself up can come back and bite you and the bum.

If anyone is the slightest bit interested in where Mikey - he of the gorgeous kind - nicked his well-informed 'contribution' from here is the link.....

(it dates back to 2006 btw)

http://boards.straig

htdope.com/sdmb/arch

ive/index.php/t-3747

04.html

I don't see the relevance of where someone gets their information from to be honest. We all get information from somewhere - where did you learn to spell, your teachers at school, where did you learn to use the internet? Does it matter?

All animal slaughter is unpleasant to say the least. Most of us haven't witnessed it, maybe if we were all made to visit an abbatoir and watch we would become vegetarians. It is available on Youtube but most of us (including me) choose not to watch it and pretend that the juicy steak we are enjoying just somehow 'got there' without any suffering. Slaughter is slaughter, I don't see how the method employed makes a difference.

BournemouthMum wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:

mikey2gorgeous wrote:

scrumpyjack wrote:
Oh and one more thing death does definately not occur within a few seconds; 2 - 4 minutes is more accurate.

(Boring maybe but rather important when deciding in a debate on whether it is cruel or whether 'it matters').

Ill-informed claptrap.

The point everyone is overlooking is that the brain has a pressure control system. The brain is an extremely delicate organ with a lot of very fine blood vessels, and if any of those vessels rupture irreparable damage is likely to occur. Not surprisingly the body has evolved a spectacularly sensitive pressure control system to stop the brain being over or under supplied with blood. The main location of that pressure control system is within the carotid sinus.

In simplified terms if the area around the carotids experiences a blood pressure change the body initiates a fainting reaction. The body collapses to bring the heart and brain to the same level. That enables it to regian control of blood pressure to the brain. When an animal has its carotid severed the blood pressure decrease causes the animal faints, not within minutes but within seconds.

Anyone who has seen animals being dispatched in this way will confirm this.

Uh oh.

Now Mikey, you made a mistake trying to ridicule people - it’s not nice to use terms such as 'ill informed' and 'clap trap'.

To then do a search on the internet and cut and paste SOMEONE ELSES contribution and pass it off as your own to try and big yourself up can come back and bite you and the bum.

If anyone is the slightest bit interested in where Mikey - he of the gorgeous kind - nicked his well-informed 'contribution' from here is the link.....

(it dates back to 2006 btw)

http://boards.straig


htdope.com/sdmb/arch


ive/index.php/t-3747


04.html

I don't see the relevance of where someone gets their information from to be honest. We all get information from somewhere - where did you learn to spell, your teachers at school, where did you learn to use the internet? Does it matter?

Uh oh chunky nosey mum with an axe to grind from a previous 'debate' alert.

I saw an alien today. It was a sort of reddy colour and as I have seen a photo of Mars and that it reddy too this is finally conclusive proof that we are visited by aliens and they are from Mars.

Feel free to use this information - you have learned something.

As much as you can ever definitely 'learn something' from an anonymous individual that is posted on a web chat. Oh unless what I have just written counts as what was it..? "medical facts" or, get this, an "original article".

But hey if that's your thinking then that's just great......

As someone who has worked in a slaughterhouse in the method where an animal is stunned, these animals are still alive until the blood drains from the carcase the heart is still beating pumping the blood out, so there is no great differance between either method the animal dies when there is no more circulation.

After reading all these comments,i have gone a bit off meat.

i dont give a monkeyss, when im *issed and i want a kabab i dont ask where its fom, (though you olny have a kabab when you are *issed), its proberly fred, spot or blacky anyway

meat is meat

pete woodley wrote:
After reading all these comments,i have gone a bit off meat.

Lettuce & Tomato sandwich for tea then Pete I hope Pam has got the bread this morning when she went shopping mate.

Wow lots of comments saying I was racist bringing this issue to the attention of the echo. You couldn't be more wrong. Race is totally irrelevant to this. The way halal meat is slaughtered is cruel. It doesn't meet the British standard and doesnt fit with our attitudes towards animal cruelty. When people spend there money - because there are no labeling laws we are unknowingly supporting mass cruelty to animals. There is a big difference when the animals are not stunned before slaughter. They have there throat cut and die slowly over 2 minutes infront of all the other animals who go nuts - the very definition of terror. A lot of the butchers who provide halal chickens are able to do it so cheaply (by cutting corners) that other non muslim businesses are buying it to. We are in a situation when we just don't know what we are buying. Read the comments by RSPCA etc in the article for other organizations views as to whether this is cruel or not

BournemouthMum wrote:
All animal slaughter is unpleasant to say the least. Most of us haven't witnessed it, maybe if we were all made to visit an abbatoir and watch we would become vegetarians. It is available on Youtube but most of us (including me) choose not to watch it and pretend that the juicy steak we are enjoying just somehow 'got there' without any suffering. Slaughter is slaughter, I don't see how the method employed makes a difference.

There is a big difference. When the chicken is not stunned prior to having its throat cut it dies slowly over 2 mins while being fully conscious with all the other chickens watching... the very definition of terror. The British standard is to stun the animals first so they don't feel it. Obviously all slaughter is unpleasant but a half civilised society should at least make the effort minimise the horror to these animals. Your right I and anyone else who even cares a little about animal cruelty should be a vegetarian. In fact it should be a goal of mankind to be completely vegetarian but we are a long way off and i like most people like meat........ this aside animal cruelty is not acceptable.

I think it's for each person to make up their mind about eating halal meat or not but I agree that restaurants/takeaway
s & shops should state if their meat is halal or not. If halal slaughter is OK & the majority of people don't care anyway what have they to lose? Personally, I feel that halal meat does bring up the question of animal welfare - I would prefer not to eat it so I don't buy food from takeaways or go to curry houses any more. Neither do I eat NZ lamb as that is all halal. I would be very pleased to read the list of non-halal places Gary found. My money, my choice.

jmd4eva wrote:
If this guy is so concerned, let him become vegetarian. Meat is dead meat, regardless of how it is killed.

I don't think this is anything more than thinly-veiled racism, IMO.

thats a very ignorant comment. As I said to the Echo this has nothing to do with race etc what so ever. This is purely a cruelty to animals issue. With the British standard animals are stunned prior to slaughter. With halal they are fully conscious, feel and see everything this is the very definition of terror. It is precisely due to a lack of knowledge ref this issue like you have displayed in your comment that I chose to write to the echo to help raise public awareness.

Adrian XX wrote:
Death occurs within a few seconds. I don't think much pain is caused (the animal very quickly loses consciousness) and does it matter anyway? - once the animal is dead, it is dead. Those few seconds where a few extra electrical signals were running through its brain and catecholamines ran through its bloodstream are gone forever and can never be revisited.

The reason a pain-free death matters to humans is we can anticipate to some extent how we are going to die and can therefore fear it. The same cannot be said for animals - they have no idea that they are approaching a time when their throats are going to be slit.

Let halal continue and if you don't like it, either ask the restaurant or become vegetarian.

yet more wholesale ignorant comments..... With halal butchery the animal can take up to 2 minutes to die. You can look on utube and watch as all the other animals waiting their turn go crazy at the sight of the first animal dieing in pain. These animals are fully conscious and aware of their surroundings experiencing every second of terror. The British standard is to stun them first so they at least don't feel the pain. I suggest you are entirely ignorant of the facts. Do some research.

BROCKSDAD wrote:
As someone who has worked in a slaughterhouse in the method where an animal is stunned, these animals are still alive until the blood drains from the carcase the heart is still beating pumping the blood out, so there is no great differance between either method the animal dies when there is no more circulation.

well said. Unfortunately the only late night takeaways (places open after 11pm) that didn't use halal products were a couple of chip shops and a couple of burger bars. If you come across any that don't use halal products suggest to them they put a sign in the window saying "we do not use halal products" For me if our government is too weak to ban halal through fear of offending religion we should at least insist on clear labeling.

gary1975 wrote:

BROCKSDAD wrote:
As someone who has worked in a slaughterhouse in the method where an animal is stunned, these animals are still alive until the blood drains from the carcase the heart is still beating pumping the blood out, so there is no great differance between either method the animal dies when there is no more circulation.

well said. Unfortunately the only late night takeaways (places open after 11pm) that didn't use halal products were a couple of chip shops and a couple of burger bars. If you come across any that don't use halal products suggest to them they put a sign in the window saying "we do not use halal products" For me if our government is too weak to ban halal through fear of offending religion we should at least insist on clear labeling.

heyyy! This is not the post i replied to!! Not well said to the above comment....... couldnt delete it. the big difference is how the animals that are not stunned are fully conscious and aware of their surroundings. Above is a comment from someone who obviously doesnt feel animals are living creatures so it doesnt matter to him if we are cruel to them or not

I agree with Gary Hazel. All restaurants, take-aways, cafes, schools and supermarkets should provide information stating whether the meat is Halal or not. After reading an article a couple of years ago which stated almost all of the meat used in schools and sold in supermarkets was Halal meat I asked the next time I went to the supermarket how the meat they sell was slaughtered I was told they didn't know. Not good enough. Everyone should have a choice and not have other's preferences forced upon them. I now use the local butcher who's meat (in my opinion) is slaughtered the humane way.

Dibbles2 wrote:
Quote"Jewish and Muslim communities are exempt from a law that requires animals to be stunned before their throats are cut."

So as a christian or a catholic are we not entitled to know if the meat is Halal?

If I go to a supermarket i know where the Halal meat is and i have the choice of buying it or not. If in a takeaway why should I have to ask when it should be made clear and then I have the informed choice. I am in no doubt whilst crusading Gary was probably subject to racist comments from staff purely for asking the question.

This is a multi cultural society and therefore we should respect different religions and races etc but that also means them respecting our religions too.

Where does this debate suggest that Jewish and Muslim communities (with respect to Kosha and Halal prepared meat) do not respect 'our religions*'?

(What exactly are 'our religions'?)

I am just curious. Will the people protesting at the cruelty of Halal (but for some reason not Kosher) meat also be protesting about battery chickens? Will they be protesting about animal testing? Will we see the BNP/EDL outside food manufactures who use these products? Will they ask for clearer labelling where products from battery chickens have been used?

Somehow I doubt it!

This is nothing to do with racism. People care about the provenance and welfare of animals. You would expect to know if the meat is organic or free range, or British. Perhaps the most important thing to know is whether the animal was killed humanely. Muslims represent 5% of the population yet nearly 46% of some animals killed are now killed in the halal method, which causes considerably more suffering than conventional slaughter. Most of the meat is sold to an unsuspecting public in order to boost the profits of those supplying it. This is actually a breach of the relevant animal welfare regulations which permit this type of slaughter to be carried out. If nothing else people should be able to make an informed decision and the meat should always be clearly labelled. This has been a serious issue here in London for a long time.

I feel the same about Shechita (kosher) slaughter too, as most of that ends up on the non-religious market as well ! Can we really justify killing animals in this dreadful way when there are alternatives?

edstar wrote:
I am just curious. Will the people protesting at the cruelty of Halal (but for some reason not Kosher) meat also be protesting about battery chickens? Will they be protesting about animal testing? Will we see the BNP/EDL outside food manufactures who use these products? Will they ask for clearer labelling where products from battery chickens have been used?

Somehow I doubt it!

I mentioned kosher to the echo as well as halal. The big difference is kosher meat doesn't get sold as normal meat certainly not to the same scale halalis. Most of the kosher meat is sold to jewish communities. Ref battery chickens and animal testing - they are serious problems but I dont see why we should raise all issues at once? As the article says this is nothing to do with race or religion. I cant help it if morons at the bnp or edl jump on the band wagon and protest against halal meats for their own reasons. It's irrelevant. PS to be talked about in the same breath as such fascist organizations is insulting.

gary1975 wrote:

edstar wrote:
I am just curious. Will the people protesting at the cruelty of Halal (but for some reason not Kosher) meat also be protesting about battery chickens? Will they be protesting about animal testing? Will we see the BNP/EDL outside food manufactures who use these products? Will they ask for clearer labelling where products from battery chickens have been used?

Somehow I doubt it!

I mentioned kosher to the echo as well as halal. The big difference is kosher meat doesn't get sold as normal meat certainly not to the same scale halalis. Most of the kosher meat is sold to jewish communities. Ref battery chickens and animal testing - they are serious problems but I dont see why we should raise all issues at once? As the article says this is nothing to do with race or religion. I cant help it if morons at the bnp or edl jump on the band wagon and protest against halal meats for their own reasons. It's irrelevant. PS to be talked about in the same breath as such fascist organizations is insulting.

Up to 80% of the meat killed using Schechita (kosher) is not classified as such as only certain cuts are considered acceptable. There is a long history of this meat being sold on unclassified. In fact it's this selling on that the producers are so keen to protect which is why they fight to ensure it is not labelled. The proceeds are used to subsidise the cost for those that want to eat it and inflate the profits of the producers. It's the same story for halal except as well as the profit angle there is a tax on certification which is sent abroad to various Muslim organisations.
You may wish to ask at Pizza Express and Weatherspoons next time you're there as you may find that there a lot more than just the takeaways serving this up without your realising it.

The law need changing to get rid of this barbaric treatment of animals.Sorry but laws against cruelty should take precident over the so called laws of any deluded religion.

pauls55 wrote:
The law need changing to get rid of this barbaric treatment of animals.Sorry but laws against cruelty should take precident over the so called laws of any deluded religion.

Agree with you 100 per cent. Legally they're not actually allowed to kill animals like this as it is against the relevant welfare regulations but there is an exemption that states that it is acceptable if the meat is to be eaten by someone of the same religion as the slaughterman for the Jewish and Muslim faiths and it is this that they use to get around the law.

We have our laws and rules for a reason and I do think they are being abused by various cultures that want to impose their own ways in our country for their own reasons. These same people do not waver by reciprocating if you visit their country. We have a system of slaughtering in the UK that has come about for the benefit of animals and the consumer and we should stick to that. Holland has banned halal meat and we should do the same and uphold our own standards not the standards of others.

Agreed! Now try and convince the council or your MP!!

Heres a link to a video for those of you that think halal slaughtering methods are not cruel. Warning it is quite distressing to watch. Not for children

http://sleepless-in-
the-uk.blogspot.co.u
k/2012/10/takeaways-
should-say-if-their-
meat-is.html

Yes, Yes, Yes isn't it time this story was brought to an end it has been going for nearly a month? As Sally Carmen states WE HAVE OUR RULES and those who come to this country should honour them as we would have to honour theirs if we went to their country. So all I can say is if you don't like our rules need I say anymore?

http://antihalalinth
euk.blogspot.co.uk/ blog relating to this article (not spam!)