Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Why so much hatred of Halal but not Kosher? Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    Would you eat Kingsmill bread? It's halal and kosher certified
    and irrelevant as no animal has its throat slit to make the bread.

    (Original post by The_Internet)
    I really don't understand the issue with halal meat
    It's not about the religion, it's about the practice of killing animals in an unnecessarily cruel way.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    They're also clearly labelled. I really don't understand the issue with halal meat, unless someone happens to be a Sikh?
    Actually, many people who follow monotheistic religions - especially Christians and Jews - are against eating halal meat because it has been prayed over (shahada or something? Not entirely sure how it works). They believe that to eat halal foods is to show acknowledgement/acceptance of another god which is a sin (and no, they don't believe that the God of all 3 religions is the same).

    On a separate note, it has also been found that in some places, the money made from halal meat is used to fund acts of jihad...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    im sorry but ive never heard of muslims protesting, whining and imposing halal meat everywhere.

    ive just seen places providing halal meat so they can cater to the demand posed by a growing/high muslim population.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    First, caring about minimising an animal's suffering and wanting to kill animals for meat are not mutually exclusive. Those that believe in the death penalty for certain crimes are fully capable of preferring a quick execution to the condemned being hung, drawn, and quartered. For that reason, I dislike halal meat as it causes more suffering than is necessary to the animal.

    Second, as an Atheist, I find the concept of religious rituals being performed over meat ridiculous. I do not feel we should be doing such things in this day and age which is also why I dislike halal meat. I suppose it's similar to a straight couple wanting a civil partnership because they disagree with the concept and symbolism of marriage; their rights are not affected in either union (substantially), but they are sticking to their beliefs.
    Except of course, halal and "normal" meat is almost the same, except for a prayer. Most halal meat is stunned..

    Second point is a fair point I guess.

    (Original post by Simes)
    and irrelevant as no animal has its throat slit to make the bread.

    It's not about the religion, it's about the practice of killing animals in an unnecessarily cruel way.
    Except of course, the process is almost exactly the same..

    (Original post by GailQ)
    Actually, many people who follow monotheistic religions - especially Christians and Jews - are against eating halal meat because it has been prayed over (shahada or something? Not entirely sure how it works). They believe that to eat halal foods is to show acknowledgement/acceptance of another god which is a sin (and no, they don't believe that the God of all 3 religions is the same).

    On a separate note, it has also been found that in some places, the money made from halal meat is used to fund acts of jihad...

    Nah, ther eis a prayer. Also, Im pretty sure it hasn't been used to fund jihad... Especially, if it's at your local bloody Subways...

    It's like saying Dont buy the Sun. Dem Jewish papers are funding wars...ie: making bigoted assumptions because you hate x people - not you personally, but society as a whole (For the record, I don't think that about Jewish people)

    And a lot of people do think that the three God's are the same. In the ME, you'l find plenty of churches that say the word "Allah" on them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    'British ways' care to define? You do realise that Britain has basically no indegineus people or culture. It has been invaded by the vikings,romans and french and has never had a fixed identity or culture. It is a mongrel nation that is historically made up of many different groups of people. Or are you trying to reinstate traditional Celtic values such as men preffering to take male sexual partners or riding naked into battle against the Christian invaders.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)

    And a lot of people do think that the three God's are the same. In the ME, you'l find plenty of churches that say the word "Allah" on them.

    Allah is the Arabic word for “God” and has been so long before the existence of Islam. Among former Muslims, many converts to Christianity commonly refer to God as “Allah.” (This is despite the fact that they recognize clear differences in the character of God as described by the Bible compared to Islamic writings. For example, although both Christians, Muslims and Jews firmly believe there is only one God, Christians have the additional doctrine of the Trinity.)

    Google is your friend
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Two things :

    1 : I don't believe Muslims normally 'impose' these things. You usually find (to my knowledge) that it was the local council or board of control, or the business owners. It's usually a marketing move to gain Muslims as customers. Who gets the blame? Muslims. Why? Because the pathetic tabloid gutter press says so.

    2 : Are we sure Halal is barbaric? Seems like a swift cut to the main artery is a fairly humane method of slaughter to me. Blood pressure drops rapidly, animal unconcious within seconds. Doesn't feel the cut. It's well known now that the Western 'bolt to the head' is not nearly as humane as people think it is. All this 'the animal writhes around in agony' is just tabloid rubbish yet again. Which, of course gullible people believe.

    I'm not a Muslim or religious btw so I'm trying to talk from a completely objective point of view.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    Except of course, halal and "normal" meat is almost the same, except for a prayer. Most halal meat is stunned..

    Except of course, the process is almost exactly the same.
    The stuff about the prayer is irrelevant. Anyone who objects because of that is a fool.

    My objection is that is not always stunned. It should be a legal requirement that it is unless imported and labelled accordingly so people can make their own decision whether to buy humane-killed meat or not.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simes)
    The stuff about the prayer is irrelevant. Anyone who objects because of that is a fool.

    My objection is that is not always stunned. It should be a legal requirement that it is unless imported and labelled accordingly so people can make their own decision whether to buy humane-killed meat or not.
    Tbh, most of the non stunned ones are probably gonna be at your local butchers and not your SUpermarkets/Subways. I read somewhere that they're legally meant to stun as part of EU rulings.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simes)
    My objection is that is not always stunned.
    Not always, no, but I belive the majority of Halal meat in the UK is indeed stunned first.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Slickback)
    'British ways' care to define? You do realise that Britain has basically no indegineus people or culture. It has been invaded by the vikings,romans and french and has never had a fixed identity or culture. It is a mongrel nation that is historically made up of many different groups of people. Or are you trying to reinstate traditional Celtic values such as men preffering to take male sexual partners or riding naked into battle against the Christian invaders.
    Exactly. When people cite 'innocent until poven guilty' etc. as 'British ways' they are actually talking about the majority of the planet, not Britain.

    There are no 'British ways' unless we enter into a stereotypical fish n chips, scones, royals, etc. Alf Garnet type of Britain, which was only ever a fantasy anyway.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    The presumption of innocence, for example, is very much an ingrained British 'way'.
    No it's not. It's an ingrained civilised way, not British. How come British have monopoly on this?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    If it meets the UK animal welfare/husbandry standards then I have no issue with it. If it doesn't then I would prefer not to buy if. For me the issue is of informed choice, we need clear definitions and labelling so that we can buy something and be comfortable with how it was reared and slaughtered.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frankieboy)
    Not always, no, but I belive the majority of Halal meat in the UK is indeed stunned first.
    And it is the minority I care about, the 12 slaughterhouses that do not stun to adhere to dhabīḥah, and whose meat does not need to be labelled as such. As a consumer, I am unable to make an informed purchasing decision because of this religion-inspired exception to EU humane slaughtering law.

    There's useful set of FAQs here:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...d-9331519.html
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simes)
    And it is the minority I care about, the 12 slaughterhouses that do not stun to adhere to dhabīḥah, and whose meat does not need to be labelled as such. As a consumer, I am unable to make an informed purchasing decision because of this religion-inspired exception to EU humane slaughtering law.

    There's useful set of FAQs here:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...d-9331519.html
    Ah the minority is of course always the problem. Just like the minority of stunned meat is done wrong and causes unnecessary distress for the animal. Could be applied to any system.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Right, so a dish, value or social norm has to be exclusive to a certain nation to be part of its culture? I guess curry is not part of Indian culture then, nor freedom of speech part of American culture either.
    When did I mention food? I was referring to ''Presumption of innocence''.

    But to respond to your point, curry is not just Indian, it's part of many cultures. And freedom of speech is not just American, it's part of most of the Western world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Then, by your logic, no country on Earth has its own 'ways'.
    I don't see how you draw that 'logical' conclusion from what I said. Seems like you're entering into a logical fallacy.

    But in response to your point - it is surprising how little of what we think are Country's ways are actually fairly generic, and not things that actually set that Country apart. Most of it is stereotyping when you actually investigate it. Sure, some Countries have 'quirks' but these are usually fairly minor and irrelevant.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    So is curry a part of Indian culture then, or not? Is freedom of speech a part of American culture, or not?
    Yes and yes (although the freedom of speech is debatable).

    My point is - they can't be used to 'define' these countries when they are shared by many other countries.

    A bit like a policeman asking you for a description of a robber, and you say 'Two eyes, nose, and mouth' - these do not actually define the person in question as they are generic, even though strictly speaking they are part of that person.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    But the robber has an individual identity, like every human, and him having blue eyes (for instance) is still a part of his identity, even though it is shared by many other humans.

    I think we are getting in semantics. There is little difference between 'part of' and 'define' when the end result is still a culture specific to that country. Remember that my post was in response to the poster who said that Britain has no culture, full stop. Britain may have cultural elements that are shared with other countries, but that does not mean it has no culture.
    Very well said and I'm perfectly happy to meet you half way on that, Madam.

    You hit the nail on the head when you say the difference between 'part of' and 'define'.

    However, I would say that a lot of the things that are cited as part of a country's culture are often fantasies or stereotypes. Or originate from other countries. We have to be careful when stating stuff that is 'part of British culture' - it's very vague indeed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    And I think that, like most things, this debate gets hijacked by extremes: one side that denies British culture exists at all, and the other side which harks back to the 1950s as to what constitutes British culture.
    Again, you hit the nail on the head. This. Exactly.

    One could, for example, argue that the Curry is now very much part of British culture - few pints then a 'Ruby Murray' etc. etc. - a lot of the curries on offer are in fact British concoctions, not Indian/Thai/Nepalese. If you'd told them it would be like that in the 1950's, Alf Garnet would've blown a gasket.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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

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