Denmark has banned Halal and Kosher slaughter

There are no plans to completely overhaul or abolish factory farming in Denmark or any other nation for that matter, it is a process that's essential for supporting the population. The issue is not whether teeth clipping or other practises conform with animal cruelty laws, it doesn't need to be written into law that it is cruel, one can gauge that easily for themselves.

Just because nothing is done over factory farming doesn't mean that Halal/Kosher is any more right. In an Ideal world, both would be banned but hey, one step at a time.

Reply 61

GlobalistSmasher

Bunch of sissies, if they're stunned what difference does it make how they're killed.Though if this will stop so many Muslims invading Denmark maybe it will be a good thing?Discriminate against the people you don't want in your country, or be like every other non-white nation on earth and stop allowing millions to live in your country?

Reply 62

the mezzil

3

Original post by Maid Marian

Is that true? Good on them :h:

Animals should come first :yes:

Original post by Silver Arrows

Yeah, I agree with that.

Original post by abbalarr95

I believe so, I read it this morning :smile:

Original post by antipathy

Good.

Religious sensitivities are no excuse for not applying the law fairly across all sectors of society.

Original post by Minnie21

Yes animal rights come up.

Did they ban killing animals?

Original post by Meenglishnogood

I think Halal and Kosher is entirely unecessarry and a bit primitive so im wiling to agree

Original post by alow

Wonderful.

Original post by Snagprophet

Damn, well done to them. I would've expected them to have banned all pork and meat not vetted as kosher or halal, but damn. They actually took control of their country rather than let abroad take control.

The ruling has nothing to do with animal welfare. Or at least, the claims that it is on those grounds are dubious at best.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2014/feb/20/denmark-halal-kosha-slaughter-hypocrisy-animal-welfare

Reply 63

michaelhaych

15

Original post by abbalarr95

I'm not entirely sure why they're doing this sorry. I didn't read much into it. I was more curious to find out what people thought about this. I understand what you mean about making it difficult for religious believers(Such as Muslims). Is it 100% necessary to only eat halal meat or are you allowed to eat meat not slaughtered the halal way?

If there is absolutely no other halal food available and the Muslim is forced by necessity, then a Muslim is allowed to eat non-halal food.

Quran 2:173 "He has only forbidden to you dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah . But whoever is forced [by necessity], neither desiring [it] nor transgressing [its limit], there is no sin upon him. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 64

alow

19

Original post by the mezzil

The ruling has nothing to do with animal welfare. Or at least, the claims that it is on those grounds are dubious at best.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2014/feb/20/denmark-halal-kosha-slaughter-hypocrisy-animal-welfare

I don't care why it's happened, just that it has.

Reply 65

Meenglishnogood

1

Original post by the mezzil

The ruling has nothing to do with animal welfare. Or at least, the claims that it is on those grounds are dubious at best.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2014/feb/20/denmark-halal-kosha-slaughter-hypocrisy-animal-welfare

doesn't matter what guardian says ( its not a proper news paper anyway) or that there maybe hypocracy in it - the fact that pointless primitive torturing of animal to death only practiced because the muslims copied tribal practices , would be reduced , is only a good outcome.

Reply 66

Guru Jason

21

Original post by Qari

I'm generally curious about this.
I have ended up with a broken nose :biggrin:

How do we know though?

Also won't they feel pain when they get stunned?

Research by the Farm and Animal Welfare Commission and the RSPCA say that stunning is the most humane way of slaughtering animals etc. I don't have the link to the article but I know I have posted it myself a few times if you go through my old posts.

Reply 67

alow

19

Original post by michaelhaych

If there is absolutely no other halal food available and the Muslim is forced by necessity, then a Muslim is allowed to eat non-halal food.

Quran 2:173 "He has only forbidden to you dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah . But whoever is forced [by necessity], neither desiring [it] nor transgressing [its limit], there is no sin upon him. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Then they'll have to be vegetarian.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 68

Zarek

21

It's ridiculous, unless they have actually banned slaughter. That would be a step forward for animal welfare.

Reply 69

Qari

20

Original post by Guru Jason

Research by the Farm and Animal Welfare Commission and the RSPCA say that stunning is the most humane way of slaughtering animals etc. I don't have the link to the article but I know I have posted it myself a few times if you go through my old posts.

did you get where I'm coming from though?

Reply 70

Guru Jason

21

Original post by Qari

did you get where I'm coming from though?

Maybe not. I think you want you wanted to know about pain caused by stunning compared to other methods such as halal etc or did I quote you wrong.

Reply 71

anosmianAcrimony

20

Original post by gideon123

pure antisematism when considering the main point of the practice of religious slaughter is to cause the least amount of pain to the animal - unlike the barbaric battery farms.....

A few points:

•

It's antisemItism, not antisemAtism.

•

It clearly isn't pure antisemitism if they're banning halal slaughter as well.

•

If the point of religious slaughter is to cause the least amount of pain to the animal, it isn't doing a very good job. Kosher slaughter requires the animal not to be pre-stunned when its throat is cut. Pre-stunning is generally considered to reduce the pain inflicted on slaughtered animals, and in many countries it is required for the slaughter to be considered humane.

Reply 72

Ggmu!

Original post by Qari

I'm generally curious about this.
I have ended up with a broken nose :biggrin:

How do we know though?

Also won't they feel pain when they get stunned?

Studies have been conducted. I'm not studying any science topic so I don't want to comment too heavily, but i'm sure there are other members who know their stuff and can point you to the right places.

As far as I know, only momentarily.

Reply 73

Albaraly

Original post by abbalarr95

I'm not entirely sure why they're doing this sorry. I didn't read much into it. I was more curious to find out what people thought about this. I understand what you mean about making it difficult for religious believers(Such as Muslims). Is it 100% necessary to only eat halal meat or are you allowed to eat meat not slaughtered the halal way?

No it has got to be Halal. I mean they don't necessarily have to eat meat but its quite an uncomfortable thing not to have the choice that's all.
However I do wonder if exported halal or kosher meat is still allowed to be sold?

Reply 74

Qari

20

Original post by Guru Jason

Maybe not. I think you want you wanted to know about pain caused by stunning compared to other methods such as halal etc or did I quote you wrong.

nope it's along those lines.
I wanted to know how pain affected by stunnig is different from other methods

Reply 75

Albaraly

Original post by Alludeen1

It's not a basic right.

I do feel that the choice to eat it is even if its not slaughtered in Denmark.

Reply 76

cBay

15

Original post by Naomi_91

You can tell who the morons are in this thread; the people who are saying its a great move, and animal rights come first.

How can you call this a animal rights move, but its still legal to kill millions of animals.

Am I allowed the kill humans as long as its pain free?

lol we're carnivores. Carnivores eat meat. Look anywhere in nature.

Reply 77

Albaraly

Original post by michaelhaych

If there is absolutely no other halal food available and the Muslim is forced by necessity, then a Muslim is allowed to eat non-halal food.

Quran 2:173 "He has only forbidden to you dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah . But whoever is forced [by necessity], neither desiring [it] nor transgressing [its limit], there is no sin upon him. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

True but I don't see how this situation can be seen as a life threatening neccessity.

Reply 78

Naomi_91

Original post by Alludeen1

It's not a basic right.

Shows how little you know.

The muslims and jews in that country will not eat meat now, and the government knows it.

Thats what makes this banning such a joke. People seem to think if halal/kosher is banned, people will just eat normal meat. lol

Reply 79

Wattsy

19

I don't agree with the removal of choice. Exactly why I think Subway's in Muslim areas are wrong as well as Denmark here. As long as animals are stunned before they kill them it shouldn't be much worse than the modern way which I have seen and whatever way you look at killing an animal it's quite unpleasant. I'll still eat meat though, I'm just aware of how it gets to my plate. The ban meat crazies have no legitimate grounds for their argument either. We can sustain eating meat just fine and why remove people's choice to eat meat. Animals are bred here to be eaten,

Denmark has banned Halal and Kosher slaughter

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you