Halal only outlets

Why do arabs think that killing animals while shouting a song and slitting their throat with a knife until they bleed a slow death is some how better than any other method?

halaal meet always tastes terrible with all the blood drained from it like that. I also think it is worst off for the animal.
 
It's all a load of crap anyway.

Meat = Meat. It ends up as the same thing, whether you stabbed it to death with a toothbrush or waited for it to die of natural causes.

I don't agree with animal cruelty, so I am biased, but it seems like you are being deliberately cruel to an animal to satisfy your own means. Similarly, keeping chickens boxed up in close conditions (battery hens) and taking the eggs yields the same results (eggs).. but 1 method is a lot more cruel.
 
ya but meat slaughter processes were put into place - presumably for a reason?

that this new religious over tolerance comes into play and now suddenly its fine to completely contravene these rules and now the UK consumer is being offered this meat - in some restaurants without substitute...its a little difficult to stomach.
 
Nickg said:
ya but meat slaughter processes were put into place - presumably for a reason?

that this new religious over tolerance comes into play and now suddenly its fine to completely contravene these rules and now the UK consumer is being offered this meat - in some restaurants without substitute...its a little difficult to stomach.
Click to expand...

You aren't forced to eat at a restaurant.

If you have such issues then it's down to you to make sure you're fine eating the type of meat they serve.
 
RDM said:
So why is it then that apart from for religious reasons it is not an acceptable method of slaughter in the UK? And that is completely aside from the absolute rubbish reasons some people give to try and justify why pork is haram.
Click to expand...

Have you ever actually seen an animal slaughter? There was a documentary on about it a few years ago where the very method they were slaughtered was practically the same as halal bar the prayer.

They were either bolted in the head or stunned, hung upside down and their throat was slit to drain the blood.

That is standard practise of slaughtering an animal.

Most people in this thread going on about it being inhumane obviously don't care THAT much otherwise they'd actually be aware of how their non-halal meat was killed.

Obviously people are just using yet another excuses to moan about "British values being taken a way from us!". Funnily enough, half of these people have such a poor grasp of the English language that you'd think they were foreigners.
 
So many people up themselves with "knowledge" when they clearly know nothing. :o

The majority of halal meat is actually stunned prior to killing firstly, which goes against the "It's cruel" nonsense people are coming out with.

All you people moaning and whinging about halal meat being against their beliefs, you're gonna have to start researching the food you buy because a hell of a lot of meat is in fact halal regardless of whether it's labelled as or not.

All those takeaways you have, you'll have to stop because from my experience, 80% of takeaways are halal, generally if the people serving you are asian/middle eastern, the food they serve will be halal.

In Liverpool 90% of the take aways have halal signs, more than half of the restaurants in the city centre are halal, all the Indian ones are definitely, even if they're fully licensed.

People need to just stop being so hateful.

Did you also know that all exported meat from NZ is halal? They figured that it'd make the most sense to make all their meat output halal, makes the most financial sense.
 
Redman said:
I hope people realise that 'halal' meat is simply meat from an animal that has had it's throat cut and then bled to death. Stunned or not, it is not humane. Why a religion would demand this, is beyond ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Guess you don't know much about animal slaughter then?
 
People need to get over the "OMG PORK" thing as well.

It's not "Pork" it's simply any animals that can have carnivorous tendencies.

Basically "eat animals that are herbivores".

Even then, the quality of such meat isn't great anyway, it all adds up to why such things are said.

Pork isn't that great a quality meat compared the other widely eaten meats such as chicken, beef and lamb.

Look at the protein synthesis rates of pork compared to that of chicken and beef.

Personally, I don't eat pork, but I also don't eat many other eats, I wouldn't eat horse, can't stand shellfish/most fish, I just find it horrible.
 
Oxy said:
isn't meat just meat but halal meat has been killed a certain way?
Click to expand...

People would have you believe there are huge differences, however the main difference is simply the reading of a prayer.

The actual method of killing isn't any different.

Stunned, throat slit to let the blood drain.
 
kylew said:
Have you ever actually seen an animal slaughter? There was a documentary on about it a few years ago where the very method they were slaughtered was practically the same as halal bar the prayer.

They were either bolted in the head or stunned, hung upside down and their throat was slit to drain the blood.

That is standard practise of slaughtering an animal.
Click to expand...

As I said in my initial post in reply to PMKeates, I didn't (and still don't) know an awful lot about animal slaughter. However I have done a little more research and done a little more reading around the subject (not a huge amount obviously as I have been out most of the afternoon). The difference is the stunning or bolting which is a requirement in UK law. Halal butchers are given an exemption from this requirement. Now some Halal butchers do still stun the animal but others consider this against the rules of Halal and so are allowed to continue slaughtering without stunning the animal. The governments own advisory panel have said this should change (Was detailed in an Indie article I linked to in an earlier post).

So if the government have decided that for humane slaughter to occur you need to stun or bolt the animal first and some halal producers already stun the animal is there any reason why religion should trump law?


kylew said:
Most people in this thread going on about it being inhumane obviously don't care THAT much otherwise they'd actually be aware of how their non-halal meat was killed.

Obviously people are just using yet another excuses to moan about "British values being taken a way from us!". Funnily enough, half of these people have such a poor grasp of the English language that you'd think they were foreigners.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I apologise for my badly broken english and hope you can answer my question despite it.
 
My mother got loads of chicken breasts from the asian supermarket the other week, was decent meat, and cheaper than comparable supermarkets. That's all that matters to me.
 
RDM said:
As I said in my initial post in reply to PMKeates, I didn't (and still don't) know an awful lot about animal slaughter. However I have done a little more research and done a little more reading around the subject (not a huge amount obviously as I have been out most of the afternoon). The difference is the stunning or bolting which is a requirement in UK law. Halal butchers are given an exemption from this requirement. Now most Halal butchers do still stun the animal but others consider this against the rules of Halal and so are allowed to continue slaughtering without stunning the animal. The governments own advisory panel have said this should change (Was detailed in an Indie article I linked to in an earlier post).
Click to expand...
Read my previous post, i explained this :p
 
RDM said:
Indeed, I apologise for my badly broken english and hope you can answer my question despite it.
Click to expand...


That part was about those complaining about "British values being taken away from us" not directed at you.

It's no co-incidence that the majority of people that go on and on about British values have terrible English skills. Look at all the BNP supporters in the BNP thread, there's a correlation between how avidly they support the BNP and how bad their English is.

The most avid supporters can barely spell, that was my point, those hating because it's something that isn't British.


As for those not stunning, you can consider them to have an affliction called "village mentality" where they believe they are still in their little backward villages and everything they do is according to "the village".

I've met countless people who have "village mentality"; it's truly debilitating.
 
Last edited:
RDM said:
It didn't answer my question though. Why should religion be allowed to trump law if, as your edit suggests, most halal butchers already adhere to the law?
Click to expand...

That's not always such a simple situation, it's entirely dependant on how the law will affect people who follow a certain religion.

I think Sikhs are a good example, male Sikhs are required to carry a small blade on them, for religious reasons and some laws have been adjusted for this to make allowances for Sikhs, something I think is fair enough, I think the requirement was for the blade to be welded to its sheath though.

That's not to say that I'm saying religious rules should trump law, but it's never really THAT simple.
 
kylew said:
That's not always such a simple situation, it's entirely dependant on how the law will affect people who follow a certain religion.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it can be quite complex, hence we allow religions to discriminate due to sexual orientation and gender still. However in the case of Halal meat, if most halal butchers already operate in a way conducive to law, why continue the exemption?

kylew said:
I think Sikhs are a good example, male Sikhs are required to carry a small blade on them, for religious reasons and some laws have been adjusted for this to make allowances for Sikhs, something I think is fair enough, I think the requirement was for the blade to be welded to its sheath though.
Click to expand...

I am afriad this is not the case. While many Sikhs do carry a welded blade there is no requirement for them to do so. Again, an exception is made to the usual law that allows them to carry a blade. Again my question would be, if a welded blade is seen as an acceptable substitute why does there need to be an exception in the law?

kylew said:
That's not to say that I'm saying religious rules should trump law, but it's never really THAT simple.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I do not think that having exceptions to laws is in any way helpful in allowing religons to intergrate into UK society. If the exception does not have to exist then why have it at all?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom