Halal Meat Being Forced On British Carnists?

[beforewisdom]

Starting at about 2:30 into the video Pat Condell talks about how the British animal agriculture industry is starting to use Halal and Kosher methods of slaughtering animals....methods more cruel than usual, for all meat in Britain.

[Fallen_Horse]

I don't see how slitting the throat is more cruel then a stun bolt. Not to mention, the halal code designates certain quality of life/slaughter requirements that are much better than any factory farm. This can only be an upgrade.

[beforewisdom]

How would you rather die?

Would you rather it happened after being knocked unconscious or would you prefer to be fully awake while you were hung upside down, had your throat cut and you bled out?

[Fallen_Horse]

Firstly they are not supposed to be hung upside down, no hanging is allowed. You are thinking of Kosher. Secondly, the captive stun bolt method has been show to keep the animal awake in up to 20% of factory farm kills. When the jugular is appropriately cut the animal loses all blood flow to the brain within a very short amount of time.

I am not saying I am pro-killing, but that the Halal standard is an improvement on the current factory farm system.

[JP]

the right wing makes a huge deal out of this - you have to think it in context.

For vegans to favour one way of killing over another when there is hardly any difference you would get very strange bedfellows (racists etc)

Its fucking ridiculous i think - like the right wing gave a fuck about the animals. Their whole life they can be mistreated, raised in crammed locations, separated from their mothers, transported in fear and panic in horrible conditions - and now they try to say they care about animals or that one split second of their lives? Give me a fucking break!

[beforewisdom]

Secondly, the captive stun bolt method has been show to keep the animal awake in up to 20% of factory farm kills. When the jugular is appropriately cut the animal loses all blood flow to the brain within a very short amount of time.

That means the the alternatives for food animals, if we go on your assumptions, is that 80% of them will be unconscious when they are attacked versus 100% of them being conscious when their throats are cut.

[beforewisdom]

the right wing makes a huge deal out of this - you have to think it in context.

For vegans to favour one way of killing over another when there is hardly any difference you would get very strange bedfellows (racists etc)

Its fucking ridiculous i think - like the right wing gave a fuck about the animals. Their whole life they can be mistreated, raised in crammed locations, separated from their mothers, transported in fear and panic in horrible conditions - and now they try to say they care about animals or that one split second of their lives? Give me a fucking break!

This is what I am curious about, not being British. I've been following Pat Condell's videos for a long time. He started off as a stand up comedian. He claims to be a liberal who is dissatisfied with the hypocrisy of liberals and their short sightedness in dealing with Islamic immigrants. His videos have gotten stronger over time.

Are you familiar with Condell's videos are are you labeling him as a racist because he doesn't like the way Islmaic immigrants are being adjusted to ( one of his problems, you have a problem with the way Islamic immigrants behave and you are dismissed a "racist").

Not being in the UK I only have his side of the story. Do you share his opinion that there is building tension between cultures in Europe or do you think his concerns are overblown? Are you familiar with his videos?

[JP]

not familiar with the guy at all, never heard.

But he is right than in many ways people in the left are a bit worried about criticising muslims in the fear of supporting right wings arguments, and actually end up playing in the pockets of the right wing.

Its about how you direct the criticism - for me as an atheist it would mean opposing mosques as much as churches, or getting upset about any religious teaching which is oppressive against women, gays, or usually the majority in the affected communities.

In terms of the halal discussion it just pisses me off how hypocritical the whole issue is. The concern for animal welfare has never been on their agenda, but now suddenly, that split second of that animals abuse filled life becomes a huge issue energising protests and angry letters to local papers. Vegans should be just advocating not killing animals at all, and maybe even using that halal issue to highlight the animal abuse throughout the industry from insemination to raising to transport to slaughter.

[mabli]

Id heard this was already happening in UK and was pretty standard that when folk eat out the meat on the menu was halal.

I used to live near a halal abottoir, it turned many in the village veggie because the screams from the animals were so distressing, something went wrong with the plumbing and blood was washing up everywhere...

The reaction as far as I remember wasnt an anti muslim backlash but an anti killing anmals and dumping blood in the river backlash... but it was years ago so I suppose things change.

[beforewisdom]

not familiar with the guy at all, never heard.

But he is right than in many ways people in the left are a bit worried about criticising muslims in the fear of supporting right wings arguments, and actually end up playing in the pockets of the right wing.

That has been my problem with his videos. Condell's videos have gotten more intense over time, but his basic message is that "our values matter too, we find some things objectionable and our leaders are letting us down in upholding those values". The problem is that the subject, mixed with his angry tone acts a defacto invitation to right wingers to come post hateful comments.

Condell's videos make it sound like there are serious cultural clashes going on in Europe. Being an American I don't know how true that is. I have been getting the impression that things most people would objectionable have been done, but the governments of Europe have been sweeping it under the rug for fear of inciting Islamic riots. For example, he had a video about the Swedish government refusing to report a high number of rapes among Muslim immigrants.

Its about how you direct the criticism - for me as an atheist it would mean opposing mosques as much as churches, or getting upset about any religious teaching which is oppressive against women, gays, or usually the majority in the affected communities.

Condell is an atheist who has made many videos criticizing Christianity in addition to other religions, in part for their treatment of gays and women.

[xrodolfox]

For vegans to favour one way of killing over another when there is hardly any difference you would get very strange bedfellows (racists etc)
Give me a fucking break!

re-quoted for truth.

[beforewisdom]

I don't want to ignite another pointless abolitionist versus welfare debate, but the manner of death as well as treatment does make a difference in the lives of animals and is important to many activists.

[ninearms]

Now, I like shooting live animals in the head...but I also like stabbing live animals in the neck. But which is better? There's only one way to find out...

[Twoism]

This is an issue that really bothers me. There was a story last year about this which obviously the sun et al used to fuel racial tensions. I had a discussion with a guy at work who was disgusted that he had possibly eaten halal meat. This guy (and the public at large) seem to think that a bolt gun kills the animal outright.

AFIK the bolt gun is not used to kill the animal outright, and rarely does. It's meant to basically make the victim braindead/unconscious. The animal is kept alive - their heart needs to be beating so they can be bled. However, sometimes it merely paralyses the animal and they still feel pain. (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Now Halal slaughter sometimes involves slitting the throat while the animal is still conscious. However, in the UK, 4 out of 5 halal slaughters involve stunning the animal first which means they are essentially the same as what people regard an "ethical" slaughter - apart from one detail which is saying a prayer before the throat is slit. True, there is still 1 out of 5 which isn't stunned - but how many bolt gun's fail in their purpose?

I just feel that the media exaggerate the difference and this has indeed caused more resentment to muslims. But what sickens me is that people sit there eating their red meat while somehow taking the moral highgound.

Off topic but in my opinion, halal slaughter is irrelevent when it comes to industrialised meat production. It was originally meant to be a sacred ritual in which the animal to be slaughtered was shown a degree of respect (they would not allow the animal to see the knife, it was done out of the sight of the other animals etc., still wrong but it's not what I'm getting at). When it comes to a conveyer belt of murder, why bother? There is no respect in this situation.

I'm an Atheist, but I get really annoyed by this ignorant hate against muslims/ethnic minorities.

Edit: http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satelli ... inary=true

I may have underestimated how many halal slaughters involve stunning - The MHS "Animal welfare review" (2004) showed that "90% of halal slaughter involved pre-stunning".

Also this is quite interesting (but probably not reliable):

Experiments for the objectification of pain and consciousness
during conventional (captive bolt stunning) and religiously
mandated (ritual cutting) slaughter procedures for sheep and
calves.
By W. Schulze, H. Schultze-Petzold, A.S. Hazem, and R. Gross

I came across it on a pro-halal site which used this as "evidence" that halal is more ethical. But it was released in 1978 so is probably irrelevent really, if you're going to cite journals they should be as recent as possible with the best possible technology/method.

[beforewisdom]

I like this picture. You get a gold star for the day.