Denmark bans kosher and halal slaughter as minister says ‘animal rights come before religion’



  • Denmark bans kosher and halal slaughter as minister says ‘animal rights come before religion’
    New law, denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders, comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions
    The ban on kosher/halal slaughter in Denmark has been slammed as an 'interference with religious freedom'
    Denmark’s government has brought in a ban on the religious slaughter of animals for the production of halal and kosher meat, after years of campaigning from welfare activists.
    The change to the law, announced last week and effective as of yesterday, has been called “anti-Semitism” by Jewish leaders and “a clear interference in religious freedom” by the non-profit group Danish Halal.
    European regulations require animals to be stunned before they are slaughtered, but grants exemptions on religious grounds. For meat to be considered kosher under Jewish law or halal under Islamic law, the animal must be conscious when killed.
    Yet defending his government’s decision to remove this exemption, the minister for agriculture and food Dan Jørgensen told Denmark’s TV2 that “animal rights come before religion”.
    Commenting on the change, Israel’s deputy minister of religious services Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan told the Jewish Daily Forward: “European anti-Semitism is showing its true colours across Europe, and is even intensifying in the government institutions.”
    Al Jazeera quoted the monitoring group Danish Halal, which launched a petition against the ban, as saying it was “a clear interference in religious freedom limiting the rights of Muslims and Jews to practice their religion in Denmark”.
    marius.jpg The ban has divided opinions in the country, particularly after it recently made headlines for animal welfare policy after Copenhagen Zoo slaughtered the “surplus” young male giraffe Marius.
    On Twitter, David Krikler (@davekriks) wrote: “In Denmark butchering a healthy giraffe in front of kids is cool but a kosher/halal chicken is illegal.”
    Byakuya Ali-Hassan (@SirOthello) said it was “disgusting” that “the same country that slaughtered a giraffe in public to be fed to lions… is banning halal meat because of the procedures”.
    Mogens Larsen (@Moq72), from Aalborg in Denmark, tweeted: “Denmark bans the religious slaughter of animals. Not even zoo lions are allowed a taste of halal giraffe.”
    Last year politicians in Britain said they would not be outlawing religious slaughter despite “strong pressure” from the RSPCA, the National Secular Society and other activists.
    I thought this was pretty interesting. All of NZ meat for export is slaughtered in a Halal/Kosher way to avoid excluding any potential market. It seems like this would be "crueler" but maybe someone in the industry who knows more could comment.
    Interesting that immediately people shout anti-Semitism



  • In the early 90s I worked in an abattoir in Aus, old mate the Muslim throat cutter had the easiest job there.
    I think I'm wrong but when I ventured onto the slaughter floor I thought they were stunned (machine looked like an airport screening thing they have inthe US) before achmed got his turn.



  • Oh and loving the argument that animals real and obvious pain comes before made up men in the sky!
    Well done Denmark



  • Oh and loving the argument that animals real and obvious pain comes before made up men in the sky!
    Well done Denmark



  • Every muslim I have met and talked to, eat pork and drink alcohol and propably couldnt care less about this. Well done to Denmark for forcing the extremist fukwits either live like normal people or fuck off.



  • Oh and loving the argument that animals real and obvious pain comes before made up men in the sky!
    Well done Denmark

    This x1000.
     
    Of course the religious fuckwits (e.g. fundamentalists) will scream "anti-Semitism" at the top of their lungs to try and paint the Denmark government as the bad guys. Exactly the same way "Islamaphobe" gets used all the time.
     
    Good to see a bit of common bloody sense prevailing over "religious freedom" for once.
     
    🙂



  • Anti-semitism? I'm pretty sure they had another group in their sights when they passed this.
    The Danes have balls, you have to give them that.



  • Jeez that is going to put the extreme left into a spin - what is the order to operations to defend that?
     
    Like that joke about being a vegan crossfitter. Which one do you say first when you meet someone?



  • Worth pointing out that New Zealand requires all animals to be stunned before slaughter.



  • Worth pointing out that New Zealand requires all animals to be stunned before slaughter.No it doesn't. The regs actually say:
    "animals need to be rendered insensible by an approved stunning method prior to slaughter, unless the animal is slaughtered by an approved method which renders the animal instantaneously insensitive."
    The decision is a commercial one taken by the meat processing companies. They assume the non-religious consumer doesn't really care one way or another about how the animal is killed, so why wouldn't they cater by default to the religious consumers who do care? I'm not saying I agree with it personally but you can understand their reasoning because there isn't any significant outcry about the way things are done now.



  • Isn't this Denmark news a couple of years old?  The only new update I can see is that Belgium maybe looking to agree with it.
     
    Which is an odd move given Brussels recent history.



  • No it doesn't. The regs actually say:
    "animals need to be rendered insensible by an approved stunning method prior to slaughter, unless the animal is slaughtered by an approved method which renders the animal instantaneously insensitive."
    The decision is a commercial one taken by the meat processing companies. They assume the non-religious consumer doesn't really care one way or another about how the animal is killed, so why wouldn't they cater by default to the religious consumers who do care? I'm not saying I agree with it personally but you can understand their reasoning because there isn't any significant outcry about the way things are done now.

    Yes but for meat to be halal it has to have its throat cut. The MIA says that all New Zealand meat is stunned before slaughter.



  • Yes but for meat to be halal it has to have its throat cut. The MIA says that all New Zealand meat is stunned before slaughter.No it categorically doesn't. I quoted the regulation. IF it is to be halal then it must have its throat cut and it must be stunned, and the stunning has to comply with regulations about that. But it doesn't have to be halal by regulation. FYI what I posted was a cut and paste from the regulation and it clearly has the word "unless" in it. So there is a choice.
    Of course if you use an "approved method which renders the animal instantaneously insensitive" it wouldn't be halal, but so what? The government does not require meat to be halal, and it doesn't require animals to be stunned.
    If people wan halal slaughter to stop their target should be the meat processors not the MPI



  • No it categorically doesn't. I quoted the regulation. IF it is to be halal then it must have its throat cut and it must be stunned, and the stunning has to comply with regulations about that. But it doesn't have to be halal by regulation. FYI what I posted was a cut and paste from the regulation and it clearly has the word "unless" in it. So there is a choice.
    Of course if you use an "approved method which renders the animal instantaneously insensitive" it wouldn't be halal, but so what? The government does not require meat to be halal, and it doesn't require animals to be stunned.
    If people wan halal slaughter to stop their target should be the meat processors not the MPI

    Animals can be slaughtered with pre-stun for some halal purposes - but, it's not acceptable in Jewish (shechita) slaughter.
     
    Good on the Danes - this is primitive rubbish.



  • Animals can be slaughtered with pre-stun for some halal purposes - but, it's not acceptable in Jewish (shechita) slaughter.
     
    Good on the Danes - this is primitive rubbish.

    Yep, agreed. I worked at Hellaby Northland / Affco Whangarei every holiday when I was at uni (6 years in all) including about 3 months operating the hoist in the kill box. Those animals were often bloody terrified and I see no excuse for fucking about with them and making things worse. In and dead in a couple of seconds is fine, but stunning is barbaric for an animal as intelligent as a cow.
    I'm pretty sure that most of the people who clamour for these special exemptions whether they are adherents themselves or PC enablers have never seen how their meat is killed so I'm not sure how they are so certain it causes no suffering as they always maintain. In my experience, except for farm kills where the cocky walks up behind one of his animals and drops it dead, all slaughtering causes suffering to some degree. We just owe it to the animals to do it as cleanly as we can, and that doesn't include bleeding the poor bastards when they're alive.



  • Anti-semitism? I'm pretty sure they had another group in their sights when they passed this.
    The Danes have balls, you have to give them that.

    And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism
     
    "New law, denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders, comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"
     
    Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.



  • As a farm



  • Oops.
    Started the last post with:
    As a farm boy, I'm all for killing animals sharp and clean, but it must be very hard to cut throats and break necks cleanly on an industrial scale



  • And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism
     
    "New law, denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders, comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"
     
    Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.

    Here's a question for the philosophers, is something anti-Semitic if it applies equally to Jews and Gentiles?
    And another's: how many groups does it have to be "anti" before it's simply unpopular?



  • And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism
    "New law, denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders, comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"
    Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.

    No shit Sherlock. Lots may bitch and moan but only a few (and one in particular) blow shit up when offended.



  • No shit Sherlock. Lots may bitch and moan but only a few (and one in particular) blow shit up when offended.

    They just use different stuff to blow shit up. Bomb vest v F16 dropping white sulphur. Potato / potarto



  • They just use different stuff to blow shit up. Bomb vest v F16 dropping white sulphur. Potato / potarto

    Well that makes perfect sense.



  • NO. Just fucking NO.



  • No it categorically doesn't. I quoted the regulation. IF it is to be halal then it must have its throat cut and it must be stunned, and the stunning has to comply with regulations about that. But it doesn't have to be halal by regulation. FYI what I posted was a cut and paste from the regulation and it clearly has the word "unless" in it. So there is a choice.
    Of course if you use an "approved method which renders the animal instantaneously insensitive" it wouldn't be halal, but so what? The government does not require meat to be halal, and it doesn't require animals to be stunned.
    If people wan halal slaughter to stop their target should be the meat processors not the MPI

    Yeah I think that was Hydro's point. That the animal must be stunned if it's going to be slaughtered halal-styles.
    I think it goes without saying that stunning is not necessary if you're going to kill the thing instantly.
     
    Honestly I don't have a problem with the NZ method. I know that to be halal they must be conscious but I certainly don't remember lambs coming down the shoot before they had their throats cut like they are anything but completely out. I guess that's why lamb etc from NZ is very much in a grey area when it comes to halal or not.
     
    From my time at the freezing works, it never looked cruel.
     
    It's probably about time that the EU came into line with NZ law and removed their religious exceptions.
    Pretty backward eh.


Log in to reply