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’<br><br>
New law, denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders, comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions <br><br><br>
The ban on kosher/halal slaughter in Denmark has been slammed as an 'interference with religious freedom' <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br><br>
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 religionâ€.<br><br>
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.â€<br><br>
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 Denmarkâ€.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.â€<br><br>
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 proceduresâ€.<br><br>
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.â€<br><br>
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.<br><br><br><br><br>
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. <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="579980" data-time="1463324216">
<div>
<p>Oh and loving the argument that animals real and obvious pain comes before made up men in the sky!<br><br>
Well done Denmark</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>This x1000.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Of course the religious fuckwits (e.g. fundamentalists) will scream "anti-<span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">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.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Good to see a bit of common bloody sense prevailing over "religious freedom" for once.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> :)</span></p> -
Anti-semitism? I'm pretty sure they had another group in their sights when they passed this.<br><br>
The Danes have balls, you have to give them that. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="580052" data-time="1463357734"><p>
Worth pointing out that New Zealand requires all animals to be stunned before slaughter.</p></blockquote>No it doesn't. The regs actually say:<br><br>
"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."<br><br>
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. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="580090" data-time="1463363910">
<div>
<p>No it doesn't. The regs actually say:<br><br>
"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."<br><br>
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.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>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.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="580123" data-time="1463373334"><p>
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.</p></blockquote>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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
If people wan halal slaughter to stop their target should be the meat processors not the MPI -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="580148" data-time="1463379130">
<div>
<p>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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
If people wan halal slaughter to stop their target should be the meat processors not the MPI</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Animals can be slaughtered with pre-stun for some halal purposes - but, it's not acceptable in Jewish (shechita) slaughter.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Good on the Danes - this is primitive rubbish.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="580159" data-time="1463382778"><p>Animals can be slaughtered with pre-stun for some halal purposes - but, it's not acceptable in Jewish (shechita) slaughter.<br>
<br>
Good on the Danes - this is primitive rubbish.</p></blockquote>
<br>
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.<br><br>
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. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="580021" data-time="1463352782">
<div>
<p>Anti-semitism? I'm pretty sure they had another group in their sights when they passed this.<br><br>
The Danes have balls, you have to give them that.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism</p>
<p> </p>
<p>"New law, <em><strong>denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders,</strong></em> comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="580212" data-time="1463400296"><p>And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism<br>
<br>
"New law, <em><strong>denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders,</strong></em> comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"<br>
<br>
Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Here's a question for the philosophers, is something anti-Semitic if it applies equally to Jews and Gentiles?<br><br>
And another's: how many groups does it have to be "anti" before it's simply unpopular? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="580212" data-time="1463400296"><p>
And yet as NQ notes, it has been bleated about as anti-semitism<br><br>
"New law, <em><strong>denounced as ‘anti-Semitism’ by Jewish leaders,</strong></em> comes after country controversially slaughtered a giraffe in public and fed him to lions"<br><br>
Its almost like lots of religions are retarded & provoke out-rage if you dare fuck with them. Not just the 'splodey ones.</p></blockquote>
<br>
No shit Sherlock. Lots may bitch and moan but only a few (and one in particular) blow shit up when offended.