Halal, is it meat you're looking for?

Castiel said:
I think we should be looking at the entire intensive farming industry to really address animal welfare...targeting a very small minority slaughter technique on,y raises questions about the motivation of animal welfare advocates.
.
Click to expand...

We are or did you miss banning of battery hens, or the pig welfare we have in auk.

Stunning has been compulsory in the uk, since 1933. It is a very easy way to enhance welfare by removing the exceptions currently allied. It is far far easier than changing all the farms for hens, which we managed. Welfare in all areas, grinds forward slowly.

And no it relay doesn't raise questions, unless you are utterly blind to all the other cries for welfare
 
Glaucus said:
20 years isn't several decades?
Click to expand...

No, it two..not several.

And 20 years is relatively recent and within the period when we have seen a large increase in immigration and the War on Terror which has increased anti-Muskim sentiment. Prior to this no one really made a big deal about it....unless you can show me mainstream media articles to show me that

Glaucus said:
Of course it's mainly centred on halal, all though kosher is mentioned a lot in such articles.

A) kosher as far as we are aware isn't being sold as normal meat.
B) hasn't had high publicity companies come out and say they are using exclusively kosher.

So it is not surprising at all and nothing to do with anti Muslim. Although some people do go that way. But that's always the case. With those two points it's not surprising in the least articles are titles halal and only briefly mention kosher. so it's far from ironic. As it's easy to avoid kosher as far as we are aware.
Click to expand...

How does that impact the animal welfare position...which is what I was referring to...you are talking about labelling which I (in agreement with the HFA) think should be legislated for.
 
Castiel said:
How does that impact the animal welfare position...which is what I was referring to...you are talking about labelling which I (in agreement with the HFA) think should be legislated for.
Click to expand...

How does that affect welfare :rolleyes: you know customer demand and the fact that selling one supplier makes it cheaper so increases halal production.

Your normally a good debate, but you are so lost in this one. It's shocking.

It should be ladled so people who don't want anything to do with religion can choose. How about other religions that don't want to support other religions?
And non stunning should be banned and in a very short time frame as it's very simple to implement.
Then we need to start moving away from stunning towards killing.
 
Castiel said:
I think we should be looking at the entire intensive farming industry to really address animal welfare...targeting a very small minority slaughter technique on,y raises questions about the motivation of animal welfare advocates.
Click to expand...

Damn that political hotbed of anti Muslim sentiment, the RSPCA! :D

Castiel said:
I agree, and I want referring to everyone as I'm sure you realise..but there is a significant proportion of people (and media) who are fuelling this not because of animal welfare, but anti-Muslim rhetoric.
Click to expand...

The problem is, when you make vague pronouncements about it being mostly anti muslim and you quote someone whilst doing it then it is going to make it seem like you are directed said comment against said person...

Even if it is anti Muslim then that isn't necessarily a bad thing, people should also be able to be free to support or not support religious practices, having non labelled halal meat does not allow them to do that.
 
Glaucus said:
We are or did you miss banning of battery hens, or the pig welfare we have in auk.

Stunning has been compulsory in the uk, since 1933. It is a very easy way to enhance welfare by removing the exceptions currently allied. It is far far easier than changing all the farms for hens, which we managed. Welfare in all areas, grinds forward slowly.

And no it relay doesn't raise questions, unless you are utterly blind to all the other cries for welfare
Click to expand...

Hmmm, we simply altered the conditions under which battery hens are raised slightly and we still allow battery chickens to be imported. If we were really concerned with animal welfare then they would have banned it totally, along with factory farming and the associated animal welfare concerns perhaps we should be focusing on the broader picture if this is truly an animal welfare problem.
 
Castiel said:
Hmmm, we simply altered the conditions under which battery hens are raised slightly and we still allow battery chickens to be imported. If we were really concerned with animal welfare then they would have banned it totally, along with factory farming and the associated animal welfare concerns perhaps we should be focusing on the broader picture if this is truly an animal welfare problem.
Click to expand...

What a straw man.

So because we are improving animal welfare in all, areas. Religion should be exempt.
I would gladly see the new battery farming banned as well as many other things, but you can in no way say we aren't improving welfare.
Removing the exemption which as you said will affect a few people is easy to implement and thus should be.


Yep good argument. You can't even debate on this thread. You aren't religious, so what exactly is holding you back in this regard?
As it makes nonsense at all and the stuff you are saying is rubbish or totally ignore points.
 
Glaucus said:
What a straw man.

So because we are improving animal welfare in all, areas. Religion should be exempt.


Yep good argument. You can't even debate on this thread. You aren't religious, so what exactly is holding you back in this regard?
As it makes nonsense at all and the stuff you are saying is rubbish.
Click to expand...

Hmm...that seems like a strawman all of its own....I don't say religion should be exempt, neither did I say that we were not improving animal welfare...what I said was instead of predominantly focusing on a very small minority practice where stunning is not done (and the evidence against it is sketchy regarding the animal welfare angle anyway) we should perhaps be looking at the broader picture if this is truly about animal welfare and nothing else.

I do not need to be religious to debate a perspective either...I support stunning, I support compulsory labelling...I don't particularly accept people's motivations for focusing on halal however, particularly using the animal welfare argument.
 
People aren't perdomently focusing on it, it's getting it's 10mintes of lime light, just like the stupid fishing laws got their lime light last year. Not that it is ever truly out of the lime light. Are you blind to decades of animal welfare protesting and reform.

And here's the crux of the problem despite what most people are paying you ignore it and think it's something darker. Ignore why it is I'm the news etc.
 
RDM said:
Damn that political hotbed of anti Muslim sentiment, the RSPCA! :D
Click to expand...

The RSPCA isn't asking for a ban on ritual slaughter.


RDM said:
The problem is, when you make vague pronouncements about it being mostly anti muslim and you quote someone whilst doing it then it is going to make it seem like you are directed said comment against said person...

Even if it is anti Muslim then that isn't necessarily a bad thing, people should also be able to be free to support or not support religious practices, having non labelled halal meat does not allow them to do that.
Click to expand...

I support (as do the HFA) regulatory labelling...however you were talking about an outright ban on ritual slaughter were you not?

Glaucus said:
People aren't perdomently focusing on it, it's getting it's 10mintes of lime light, just like the stupid fishing laws got their lime light last year. Not that it is ever truly out of the lime light. Are you blind to decades of animal welfare protesting and reform.
Click to expand...

I wonder what the thread ratio is regarding Halal--->fishing rights. :)

I think you are confusing the perspective of animal welfare reform generally, which is what I was saying is being overlooked and focusing on a specific minority area...I did not say that means there is no reform it that there has been none, only that there is a disproportionate amount of focus, particularly in the media and that is reflected on this forum at the moment on halal foods (the vast majority of which meet or surpass current animal welfare regulations..something you advocated earlier in this thread) and I question the motivation for that. As I said, you seem confused over what is being proposed and what you think is being stated.

Glaucus said:
And here's the crux of the problem despite what most people are paying you ignore it and think it's something darker. Ignore why it is I'm the news etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring anything, I quote the positions I wish to discuss or question, there are many position and posters who I agree with, plenty of assertions I accept..I don't quote them or reference them because it is unnecessary for the point I was making.
 
Castiel said:
The RSPCA isn't asking for a ban on ritual slaughter.




I support (as do the HFA) regulatory labelling...however you were talking about an outright ban on ritual slaughter were you not?
Click to expand...

No, I was calling for an outright ban on non stunned ritual slaughter and regulatory labelling.
 
OldCoals said:
Me too.
Click to expand...

That isn't what you said though was it..you said ban ritual slaughter, it's as simple as that. RDM may well have been referring to non-stunning, but you clearly were not.


RDM said:
No, I was calling for an outright ban on non stunned ritual slaughter and regulatory labelling.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's fair enough, although I'm not convinced as to the animal welfare angle against ritual slaughter as long as the death is swift and done correctly as opposed to mechanical slaughter where there is also animal welfare concerns regarding the treatment and pain experienced by animals. I would need to see some more definitive evidence than is currently available, even if some people like Glaucus accept said evidence.

Labelling should be compulsory, and not only whether it is halal or not, but also if it is stunned and how it is slaughtered. That is the only way a person can choose objectively what they buy.

I will leave you all with An interesting perspective from a recent article from the Guardian.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...oncern-animal-welfare-muslim-ritual-slaughter

I'm going to eat my organic, free range egg sandwich.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom