Denmark bans kosher and halal slaughter as minister says ‘animal rights come before religion’
-
<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. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rancid Schnitzel" data-cid="580246" data-time="1463435360">
<div>
<p>No shit Sherlock. Lots may bitch and moan but only a few (and one in particular) blow shit up when offended.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>They just use different stuff to blow shit up. Bomb vest v F16 dropping white sulphur. Potato / potarto</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="580417" data-time="1463474808"><p>
They just use different stuff to blow shit up. Bomb vest v F16 dropping white sulphur. Potato / potarto</p></blockquote>
<br>
Well that makes perfect sense. -
<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>Yeah I think that was Hydro's point. That the animal must be stunned if it's going to be slaughtered halal-styles.</p>
<p>I think it goes without saying that stunning is not necessary if you're going to kill the thing instantly.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>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.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>From my time at the freezing works, it never looked cruel.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's probably about time that the EU came into line with NZ law and removed their religious exceptions.</p>
<p>Pretty backward eh.</p>