Halal, is it meat you're looking for?

I wasnt saying that anything had been banned, just saying what could happen next as what has been done is to please a minority of people who like to have things changed to their way of living.

I personally dont know anyone that doesnt like bacon / ham.

What they have to remember is that everyone should be able to have a choice when they shop. Removing something because of a religious belief is really retarded. No way they can say it was not a profitable line!!!
 
badcompany said:
Hurry up and ban it already.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...imal-rights-come-before-religion-9135580.html
Click to expand...

Is this the same Denmark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands



http://www.nordichunters.org/page381.aspx

Denmark is famous for hunting and has a rich and long tradition of shooting driven pheasant and small game at traditional rough shoots. We also watch gold medal class Roebuck stalking during the spring.
Click to expand...

In the neighboring country of Norway we offer hunts for European reindeer and in Denmark for red deer, fallow deer, Sika deer and driven pheasants. There is a great variety of species that can be combined, so the choice is yours.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Well, there seems to be two definitions of the Halal technique.
One that allows pre-stunning, and one that doesn't.

I am completely against the definition/practice of not stunning the animal before death.

If the animal is stunned, the method of killing after doesn't really matter to me.

If some guy wants to prey before, during or after the killing of the animal, well who gives a ****.
 
Craterloads said:
You point was to ban and demonstrated by showing an article to the kind hearted Danes, animal welfare lovers Danes banning Halal/Kosher.

Not that you simply want it labled up, which would have been an excellent point.
Click to expand...


Your portraying that image to say the look the Danish kill cruelly. But they don't sell that meat pretending to be something else.

Ban it.

Phone malfunction sorry.
 
Last edited:
spoffle said:
What is it that makes you think it's cruel? This is a genuine question, I'd like to know your thought process when it comes to thinking about why it's cruel.
Click to expand...

While being killed is obviously not going to be pleasant, I personally feel that if the animal has to be slaughtered for food then it should be done as quickly and humanely as possible. I think its cruel to slit the throat of a live being and let it bleed out, this cannot be a humane way to die as we would not do this to a criminal on death row if we had such a system in the UK, and I feel that bleeding to death consciously would not be my chosen method of dying, I'd rather it be sudden.

The way I believe it should be done is via a stunning method that quickly makes the animal unconscious to help prevent unnecessary suffering.

This whole deal to my mind is largely a lack of information given to the customer on how the meat is produced, packaging should list the method for killing the animal along with information on how it was reared etc
 
Last edited:
Something Else said:
While being killed is obviously not going to be pleasant, I personally feel that if the animal has to be slaughtered for food then it should be done as quickly and humanely as possible. I think its cruel to slit the throat of a live being and let it bleed out, this cannot be a humane way to die as we would not do this to a criminal on death row if we had such a system in the UK, and I feel that bleeding to death consciously would not be my chosen method of dying, I'd rather it be sudden.

The way I believe it should be done is via a stunning method that quickly makes the animal unconscious to help prevent unnecessary suffering.

This whole deal to my mind is largely a lack of information given to the customer on how the meat is produced, packaging should list the method for killing the animal along with information on how it was reared etc
Click to expand...

It has been shown that the stunning method is actually the one that causes more pain, and that the throat slitting method causes the least? Due to the drop in blood pressure to the brain from the throat being slit, the brain goes unconscious. This doesn't happen with the stunning method.

Note, I am not arguing for or against religious methods of slaughter, I am not religious and I find the notion of Halal meat odd when compared to how seafood is considered in Islam, in that it doesn't have to be Halal, despite the far worse ways it's acquired and killed compared to land animals (pulled out of the sea and left to suffocate).
 
Last edited:
45705163.jpg


the whole thread
 
spoffle said:
It has been shown that the stunning method is actually the one that causes more pain, and that the throat slitting method causes the least? Due to the drop in blood pressure to the brain from the throat being slit, the brain goes unconscious. This doesn't happen with the stunning method.
Click to expand...

Evidence that is not from some Islamic Study?

Efour said:
45705163.jpg


the whole thread
Click to expand...

Where does it state this not just don't some post here.
 
Craterloads said:
Is it true that the ordinary public or not allowed to eat swans? and only the royal family can?
Click to expand...

Yes, maybe

Swans are protected by law under the wild bird regulations. So no killing eating for us,

As for the queen.
the British Monarch retains the right to ownership of all unmarked mute swans in open water, but Queen Elizabeth II only exercises her ownership on certain stretches of the Thames and its surrounding tributaries. This ownership is shared with the Vintners' and Dyers' Companies, who were granted rights of ownership by the Crown in the 15th century.[
Click to expand...
So would need to go to court, and see if the ownership over throws the wild bird act. But probably not. But that's never going to go to court to find out.

spoffle said:
It has been shown that the stunning method is actually the one that causes more pain, and that the throat slitting method causes the least? Due to the drop in blood pressure to the brain from the throat being slit, the brain goes unconscious. This doesn't happen with the stunning method.

Note, I am not arguing for or against religious methods of slaughter, I am not religious and I find the notion of Halal meat odd when compared to how seafood is considered in Islam, in that it doesn't have to be Halal, despite the far worse ways it's acquired and killed compared to land animals (pulled out of the sea and left to suffocate).
Click to expand...

It has been showing stunning method works in 90-95% of cases and that non stunning, leads to server pain for 20-42 seconds in adult cattle. And around 7 seconds in sheep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom