Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Netherlands set to ban halal/kosher slaughter without stunning watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wtfCharlie)
    Good. I love the idea of respecting the animal with a prayer etc, but it should be done as humanely as possible.
    Cattle or lifestock stunned with electricity are more likely to feel pain for longer than Cattle or lifestock whose juggular vein is slit instantly, killling it just as fast as or even faster than being stunned with electricity.

    Infact the quality of meat that is stunned is poor compared to halal/kosher meat. By stunning the lifestock blood vessels burst and Haemorrhages form.

    Cutting the veins on the neck of the animal also drains all blood from it's body. EEG medical studies have shown that the direct method of slaughter (cutting the neck veins) is infact PAINLESS to animals.

    In conclusion people that consume Non Halal/Kosher meat products are actually cruel to animals. Perpetuating the myth that shocking the animal is far more humane is insanity. I think it's just that westerners look down upon cutting the neck of the animal as it seems Barbaric. When infact it IS the most humane.

    I don't know about Kosher meat, but I know that Cattle being slaughtered in the Halal manner is treated well, fed, given water. And then killed. The animal is not forced to move to many areas, and does not experiance alot of stress.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Agree, why do normal abattoirs have to do it but because of some stupid religious thing they dont have to stun the animal, stupid, rules in england are stupid, they apply to some people and not to others
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I can't see the point here why advocate for slaughtering humanely when it eventually ends in our stomachs?

    It's like saying punch this guy in the face but first wash your hands so that you don't spread disease.

    Personally i would rather be beheaded than be stunned and then be beheaded but that's just a matter of taste.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For those who complain about Hallal slaughter, let's see what they have to say about how 'humane' this kind of slaughtering is:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ--faib7to
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't understand what argument anti-Muslim groups have against both Halal and Kosher meat? "we don't like Muslims so let's ban them from certain religious practises, but to make it fair, let's do the same to to Jews. And make it look like we care about the welfare of the cattle."
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Treating Islamic practices consistently with Netherlands law? Outrageous!
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    Cattle or lifestock stunned with electricity are more likely to feel pain for longer than Cattle or lifestock whose juggular vein is slit instantly, killling it just as fast as or even faster than being stunned with electricity.

    Infact the quality of meat that is stunned is poor compared to halal/kosher meat. By stunning the lifestock blood vessels burst and Haemorrhages form.

    Cutting the veins on the neck of the animal also drains all blood from it's body. EEG medical studies have shown that the direct method of slaughter (cutting the neck veins) is infact PAINLESS to animals.

    In conclusion people that consume Non Halal/Kosher meat products are actually cruel to animals. Perpetuating the myth that shocking the animal is far more humane is insanity. I think it's just that westerners look down upon cutting the neck of the animal as it seems Barbaric. When infact it IS the most humane.

    I don't know about Kosher meat, but I know that Cattle being slaughtered in the Halal manner is treated well, fed, given water. And then killed. The animal is not forced to move to many areas, and does not experiance alot of stress.
    My opinion vegetarian and a veterinary student -

    While I don't want to see any animals killed in any way, I don't believe, for the most part, that modern slaughter methods with stunning are preferable to halal slaughter in a significant way. There are many cases, especially with chickens, where the stunning (which is sometimes carried out by hanging chickens upside down and passing their heads through an electrified bath) doesn't always kill the animal and the suffering is alot worse (especially where the animal is injured from the convulsions caused by the shock).

    On the other hand bovines are the big exception. While cutting the carotid artery of any other animals (pig, goat, chicken, cat, human etc) will kill the animal within 8 seconds at most, cows have a second blood supply to the brain from the spinal artery (which becomes the basilar artery). This means that cutting the carotid in bovines only prevents 2/3 of the blood reaching the brain - resulting in a painful death for the animal which can last over 30 seconds. Stunning of bovines doesn't use electricity but a captive bolt gun; which kills the animal almost instantly due to rapid compression and decompression inside the cranial cavity.

    3 points:

    - Halal slaughter of non-bovines isn't completely painless but relatively so.

    - Most halal-slaughtered animals weren't designated for that purpose - they are often breeding animals which have come to the end of their economically useful lifespan.

    - Draining blood from the animal's body, after it is probably already dead, does not reduce the suffering. It is, and has always been, for the cosmetic value of the meat (and has by extension taken on a religious significance for certain people).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    outright deploring, animals before human's? whats coming now????

    "save the plants, use a stunner mower for humane results" - The party of the GrassMen
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Good. It's a step towards a greater consideration of non-human animal suffering. Although, if we're acknowledging that non-human animals deserve some moral consideration then I don't really see how we can justify the way they we treat them. Even if this is a step in the right direction.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    As for me, a meat-eater, I don't see a difference. The animal still dies and it can be reasonably assumed it goes through pain whatever the weather.
    Hyperbolic but would you not care if the animal was killed by being beaten to death or stabbed and left to bleed out or something? If we're going to breed animals purely to eat them, then the very least we can do (as civilized sentient creatures) is to make it as quick and painless for them as possible. Besides even if you don't care about animal rights there is some correlation between product quality and treatment of animal. When talking about overall welfare the method of slaughter is something which should be considered.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Dustinthewind*)
    Unless studies can conclusively show that the kosher way of killing is far more painful for the animals
    I love it how people are saying stuff like this! Do you really think that this decision is ignorantly being led by a pack of brain dead idiots or something? The majority of the country's MP's support this, I would like (and hope) to think that the people running the Netherlands are bloody well advised!

    "She believes that humane treatments of animals trumps religious tolerance"
    I also agree with that 200%
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mohamed aden)
    outright deploring, animals before human's? whats coming now????

    "save the plants, use a stunner mower for humane results" - The party of the GrassMen
    Haha!

    People come out with such rediculous arguments is unbelieveable.

    A dead animal is a dead animal, whether you shoot it with a 50. calibre or chop it up with a samurai sword, it just does not matter. How can killing an animal be humane in first place?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You know what, the trees and grass should have their own RSPCA version.

    Green society for the prevention of cruelty for Plants (GSPCP).

    It's a fact that plants an trees can feel pain too, so it should be done in a humane manner. Chainsaw or axe?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    We should bring in legislation like this in this country. Our animal standards are good in comparison to other countries, but this is one area we are seriously lacking. Industrial farming is still an issue, but that's unlikely to change due to economical reasons, which is a shame
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 4ttari)
    Haha!

    People come out with such rediculous arguments is unbelieveable.

    A dead animal is a dead animal, whether you shoot it with a 50. calibre or chop it up with a samurai sword, it just does not matter. How can killing an animal be humane in first place?
    lool precisely

    Rather a silly argument! i might as well join the fictitious Green fundamentalist group who say "Your car is emitting fumes which is killing innocent toads in Brazil" and they miraculous get a couple of seats in the British Parliament, and then suddenly they are close to putting through a law banning cars with fumes, with no consideration of people's way of life for the past 50 years< all under the banner of "save the Brazilian toads!" < now imagine with muslim/jewish faiths who have been here for more then a 1000 years :confused:

    Just imagine if the so-called stone hunter gathers had this argument :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It is simply far too easy in a debate of this magnitude to be derailed, bring facts/articles/concrete studies not theories or baseless arguments im open to different ideas!

    Regarding whether or not specifically it is more humane to stun animals, (keep in mind that the term humane is open to debate due to difference in human perception). For my readers sake lets assume Humane means " Upholding the moral principle that all slaughtering is done with the intent to minimize the pain that is inflicted upon the animal, whether sacrilegious or not"

    IN Islam

    "The animal is not to be harshly restrained, nor hoisted up by chains, nor is the animal to see the knife. Skillful slaughter brings about a quick and relatively painless death. According to studies of the correctly preformed Halal method of slaughter, the animal registers little pain and died quickly, the but heart continues to pump blood out of the body, which purifies the meat from potential disease."(Vincent J. Cornell - Voices of Islam: Voices of Life: Family, Home, and Society - Volume 3 - Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007 - Page 16).

    Moreover, an academic named Professor Schultz and his colleague: Dr. Hazim scientifically & objectively proved the Zabiha method to be superior over all other methods:

    "Professor Schultz of Hanover University, Germany, performed a comparative experiment between methods of slaughter. He compared modern "captive bolt gun" (CBG) stunning method to the Islamic method, using electrodes to record the electrical brain activity of the animals. With the Islamic method, the graph showed that the animal felt no pain at the point of the incision or for the following moments. A reflex of the spinal cord caused the body to convulse vigorously, which completely drained it of all blood. The graph showed zero level of pain during the entire process, and the end result was clean and hygienic meat for the consumer.

    On the other hand, the stunning method rendered the animal unconscious for a second, which was immediately followed by severe pain. The stunning caused the animal's heart to stop sooner than that of the halal method. The result was that a lot of blood was retained inside the body - unhygienic meat for the consumer and a lot of pain for the animal." (Duaa Anwar - The Everything Koran Book - Everything Books, 2004 - Page 101)."
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    Hyperbolic but would you not care if the animal was killed by being beaten to death or stabbed and left to bleed out or something? If we're going to breed animals purely to eat them, then the very least we can do (as civilized sentient creatures) is to make it as quick and painless for them as possible. Besides even if you don't care about animal rights there is some correlation between product quality and treatment of animal. When talking about overall welfare the method of slaughter is something which should be considered.
    There was a thread a few weeks ago recounting a football player fatally kicking the other team's mascot owl off the pitch, where I likened the event to meat-eating. I will out myself as having double standards on the issue; I eat meat though would never hurt a wild animal myself. I realise that I am in no position to complain though if another individual does so.

    The very least we can do is not do it at all. If we were that civilised we wouldn't do it.

    As for quality you might be right.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    There was a thread a few weeks ago recounting a football player fatally kicking the other team's mascot owl off the pitch, where I likened the event to meat-eating. I will out myself as having double standards on the issue; I eat meat though would never hurt a wild animal myself. I realise that I am in no position to complain though if another individual does so.

    The very least we can do is not do it at all. If we were that civilised we wouldn't do it.

    As for quality you might be right.
    Yeah, I opened that owl thread. You seem to be a realist so surely you can understand that stopping the consumption of animals full stop is not going to happen any time soon. With that said we should (and thankfully are) constantly striving towards better quality of life from birth to the moment of death for our meat industry animals (whether such guidelines are put into practice is another matter), so if the Dutch people wish to outlaw ritual slaughter under the guise of animal welfare, then they're well within their right to do so. Personally I'm glad certain religious practices do not receive exemption from the law (i.e the ban on face coverings in France).

    A more recent study (talked about here http://www.grandin.com/ritual/slaugh...uses.pain.html) showed that ritual slaughter does indeed cause pain, especially in cows, so why not propagate the notion that an animal should be rendered unconscious prior to slaughter? It's worth noting that the knife restrictions in Kosher are actually a good thing as the length of the knife stops the tip from gouging the wound causing the animal to struggle violently; such restrictions don't exist with Halal methods but for the sake of consistency they both should [according to the Dutch] be outlawed.

    (sorry for my grammar here it's late and I can't be bothered)
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by crazycake93)
    Cattle or lifestock stunned with electricity are more likely to feel pain for longer than Cattle or lifestock whose juggular vein is slit instantly, killling it just as fast as or even faster than being stunned with electricity.

    Infact the quality of meat that is stunned is poor compared to halal/kosher meat. By stunning the lifestock blood vessels burst and Haemorrhages form.

    Cutting the veins on the neck of the animal also drains all blood from it's body. EEG medical studies have shown that the direct method of slaughter (cutting the neck veins) is infact PAINLESS to animals.

    In conclusion people that consume Non Halal/Kosher meat products are actually cruel to animals. Perpetuating the myth that shocking the animal is far more humane is insanity. I think it's just that westerners look down upon cutting the neck of the animal as it seems Barbaric. When infact it IS the most humane.

    I don't know about Kosher meat, but I know that Cattle being slaughtered in the Halal manner is treated well, fed, given water. And then killed. The animal is not forced to move to many areas, and does not experiance alot of stress.

    Sources from non Islamic/Jewish sources please.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Sources from non Islamic/Jewish sources please.
    In 1978, a study incorporating EEG (electroencephalograph) with electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of 17 sheep and 15 calves, and conducted by Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany concluded that "the slaughter in the form of a ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions" (of the animals) and that "For sheep, there were in part severe reactions both in bloodletting cut and the pain stimuli" when captive bolt stunning (CBS) was used. This study is cited by the German Constitutional Court in its permitting of dhabiha slaughtering.

    Happy?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 10, 2011
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.