We need the Religious Slaughter Ban Worldwide. Watch

TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#1
It needs to stop, all religious slaughter houses that haven't adopted the stun method need to be banned, the cruelty animals are suffering is disgusting, the majority of religious slaughter houses already include the stun so why can't all the religious slaughter houses adopt this method?

When I say we need to ban the religious slaughterhouses I am fine with the ones which have already adopted the humane approach to slaughtering animals, with a stun to the head, instantaneous and pain free, unlike the method which many religious slaughterhouses adopt, by slitting the throat first, the animal is in pain for several minutes, conscious and gasping for whatever air it can get.

If they do not adopt this method they must be banned and shutdown
3
reply
Jjj90
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 weeks ago
#2
'the humane approach to slaughtering animals'. Don't get me wrong - I eat meat; but lets stop kidding ourselves.
9
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#3
(Original post by Jjj90)
'the humane approach to slaughtering animals'. Don't get me wrong - I eat meat; but lets stop kidding ourselves.
Well it is painless, so it's as humane as killing animals can be.
0
reply
Decahedron
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 weeks ago
#4
Impossible to ban anything worldwide, as great as it sounds it just isn't possible.

I do think people in general should be more aware of how their food goes from field to plate. It disgusts me that some people completely detach themselves from the fact they are eating a once living creature.
2
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
What about non-religious slaughter? What about the slaughter of millions of people being perpetrated across the globe by secular and atheistic groups that despise religion?

Murder and mayhem are not limited to people who subscribe to religions. They are, I feel, traits that all humans are susceptible to.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 3 weeks ago
3
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by Pinkisk)
What about non-religious slaughter? What about the slaughter of millions of people being perpetrated across the globe by secular and atheistic groups that despise religion?

Murder and mayhem are not limited to people who subscribe to religions. They are, I feel, traits that all humans are susceptible to.
Please don’t talk about atheistic extremists like they’re nearly as high in population to religious extremists, since when did we even get to that, I’m talking about animals, religious slaughterhouses that haven’t adopted the stun method, if you don’t want to talk about that and instead talk about other aspects and sectors of killing related to the human being the harmed party maybe you shouldn’t have commented.
1
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 weeks ago
#7
I don't agree.
Its totally unworkable on a global level, would be bitterly resisted by many ultra traditionalist factions and portrayed as religious persecution.
Not a chance that the haredi ultra orthodox sects would comply- in israel, britain or the us.
I doubt there would be much support for it amongst salafi groups within the middle east.

The language within your final sentence is rather aggressive sounding "obliterated from the face of the earth".
2
reply
the_logician
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 weeks ago
#8
From my knowledge of religions, I'm aware that some of them (including Islam and Judaism) have a particular way of killing animals before they are eaten. Asking them to change their ways would be asking them to go against their religions' traditions.
Not that I'm saying that we should all kill animals in the most brutal ways possible. But take into consideration what their religion tells them.
2
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by the_logician)
From my knowledge of religions, I'm aware that some of them (including Islam and Judaism) have a particular way of killing animals before they are eaten. Asking them to change their ways would be asking them to go against their religions' traditions.
Not that I'm saying that we should all kill animals in the most brutal ways possible. But take into consideration what their religion tells them.
Well that’s the thing, mostly all religious people allow for the stun method, they have no problem with it.
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by TheNamesBond.)
Please don’t talk about atheistic extremists like they’re nearly as high in population to religious extremists, since when did we even get to that, I’m talking about animals, religious slaughterhouses that haven’t adopted the stun method, if you don’t want to talk about that and instead talk about other aspects and sectors of killing related to the human being the harmed party maybe you shouldn’t have commented.
Oh I see. Apologies. I misunderstood your title.

hmmm....who's to say that stunning the animal is a more humane way of slaughtering animals? Also, there's a lot more to slaughtering than just the humanity of the process. Humans are going to be eating the meat so the slaughter has to be done in a way that would produce food that is healthy for consumption. Is stunning an animal with a stun gun before shooting it in the head, hanging it upside down and draining its blood a healthy way of slaughtering animals?

Religions believe that the most healthy way of slaughtering an animal is to use their specific methods. In Judaism animals need to be slaughtered by very strict Kashrut laws which require kosher animals to be slaughtered without suffering. The animals are usually fed days before they are slaughtered to ensure they don't die hungry, which would exacerbate their suffering. They are offered food and water before the slaughter. They are also checked for diseases to insure they are not ill. An animal that is ill goes through increased suffering during a slaughter. This renders the meat non-kosher. Therefore animals that are ill are not slaughtered. The animals are slaughtered individually and not in front of other animals as to not cause other animals distress. The process must be carried out by a Shochet, a professional, trained and certified to be competent in the slaughter of animals by Jewish law. They are taught to slaughter the animal in a way that does not cause it unecassry suffering. They have very strict rules that they must follow. These include a requirement for the knife to be sharp. They must not apply undue pressure on the knife during slaughter. Every little thing is controlled by very strict rules that revolve around slaughtering the animal in the most humane way possible. A lot of people are ignorant of these rules and regulations. I think if people who are apposed to these processes understood these rules and regulations they would be more sympathetic towards the process.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 3 weeks ago
2
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by londonmyst)
I don't agree.
Its totally unworkable on a global level, would be bitterly resisted by many ultra traditionalist factions and portrayed as religious persecution.
Not a chance that the haredi ultra orthodox sects would comply- in israel, britain or the us.
I doubt there would be much support for it amongst salafi groups within the middle east.
We’ve already got many religious slaughterhouses adopting this method, a select few remain that do not, yes, it would be seen as an outrage, I don’t see why, now that we’ve developed our science and know that it is less harmful I would think they would've updated their method like many others, but that’s besides the point, I get you, many wouldn’t agree to it, it just seems outrageous to me that actual physical and mental abuse of animals isn’t as important as people unwilling to change their ways.


(Original post by londonmyst)
The language within your final sentence is rather aggressive sounding "obliterated from the face of the earth".
Cool?
0
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by TheNamesBond.)
Well that’s the thing, mostly all religious people allow for the stun method, they have no problem with it.
That's not accurate as regards orthodox judaism.
Half of uk based halal butchers use the stun method.
Many ultra traditionalists from very socially conservative sects have a big problem with it.
To the point where they demand their meat is not stunned and direct hostility at co-religionists willing to make this compromise.
My boss is one of them; doing his food shopping should be a full time job on its own.
1
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Oh I see. Apologies. I misunderstood your title.
No worries

(Original post by Pinkisk)
hmmm....who's to say that stunning the animal is a more humane way of slaughtering animals?
It is, a bolt is driven through the skull instantly leaving the animal unconscious, rather than slitting the throat of an animal whilst it’s wide awake and causing the animal to suffer several minutes of pain.

(Original post by Pinkisk)
There's a lot more to slaughtering than just the humanity of the process. Humans are going to be eating the meat so the slaughter has be done in a way as to produce food that is healthy for consumption.
And why is the modern method not leading to healthy food consumption exactly?

(Original post by Pinkisk)
Religions believe that the most healthy way of slaughtering an animal is to use their specific methods.
Their ‘specific methods’ are extremely outdated, we have actual science proving there is a more humane manner, and regarding your point about the meat being healthy, it’s as healthy as can be, why wouldn’t it?

(Original post by Pinkisk)
In Judaism for animals to be slaughtered by very strict Kashrut laws which require for meat to be kosher require kosher animals to be slaughtered without suffering.
The animals are usually fed days before they are slaughtered to ensure they don't die hungry, which exacerbates their suffering. They are also checked for diseases to insure they are not ill. An animal that is ill goes through increased suffering during a slaughter. This renders the meat non-kosher. The process must be carried out by a Shochet, professional, certified to b competent in the slaughter of animals by Jewish law. They are taught to slaughter the animal in a way that does not cause it unecassry suffering. They have very strict rules that they must follow. These include a requirement for the knife to be sharp. They must apply undue pressure on the knife during slaughter. Every little thing is controlled by very strict rules that revolve around slaughtering the animal in the most humane way possible. A lot of people are ignorant of these rules and regulations. I think if people understood them they would be more sympathetic towards the process.
Feeding them a buffet before their throats are slit doesn’t change the fact that they are conscious for several minutes since their spinal cords are still intact, if they’re interested in the humane approach then by all means, we have the stun, it’s right up there with their clear beliefs in not causing the animal unnecessary pain and also gets the same job done, if the stun was invented thousands of years ago I’m sure they’d go for it.
Last edited by TheNamesBond.; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by TheNamesBond.)
No worries



It is, a bolt is driven through the skull instantly leaving the animal unconscious, rather than slitting the throat of an animal whilst it’s wide awake and causing the animal to suffer several minutes of pain.



And why is the modern method not leading to healthy food consumption exactly?



Their ‘specific methods’ are extremely outdated, we have actual science proving there is a more humane manner, and regarding your point about the meat being healthy, it’s as healthy as can be, why wouldn’t it?



Feeding them a buffet before their throats are slit doesn’t change the fact that they are conscious for several minutes since their spinal cords are still intact, if they’re interested in the humane approach then by all means, we have the stun, it’s right up there with their clear beliefs in not causing the animal unnecessary pain and also gets the same job done, if the stun was invented thousands of years ago I’m sure they’d go for it.
Stunning isn't prohibited in the preparation of kosher meat. I think there is a lot of ignorance surrounding the religious slaughter process. This ignorance leads people to disagree with the process, without I feel justification. I think people need to read up on religious methods of slaughter. They are not as the media makes them out to be.

In Judaism Rabbis have been debating the most humane way of slaughter for many hundreds of years. It is a very important topic to us.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
gr8wizard10
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 weeks ago
#15
no thanks, i need to eat halal meat
1
reply
Megxn0
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 weeks ago
#16
Animals like Deers and pigeons are shot for their meat, without being stunned. How would you ban that?
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
2
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by londonmyst)
That's not accurate as regards orthodox judaism.
Half of uk based halal butchers use the stun method.
Many ultra traditionalists from very socially conservative sects have a big problem with it.
To the point where they demand their meat is not stunned and direct hostility at co-religionists willing to make this compromise.
My boss is one of them; doing his food shopping should be a full time job on its own.
Well that’s why I said most, not all, it seems irrational to me that some people would follow an old ruling from thousands of years ago which say to not kill the animal in a painful manner when the method currently being used is painful, all this whilst there is an alternative solution which still holds the rulings that they shouldn’t be killed in a painful manner.
0
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by gr8wizard10)
no thanks, i need to eat halal meat
No ones saying you can’t, of course you can eat halal meat, that’s not what my beef is with ( pun unintended ), my problem is with religious slaughterhouses that don’t use the stun method.
0
reply
134841422
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 weeks ago
#19
There's a saying in Japanese culture that goes something like this: 'The more cruel the death, the tastier the meal'
That's what some Japanese dude on youtube said right before he impaled a live Lobster through the head with a Kitchen knife

EDIT: I can't find the original video on youtube but I do have an article backing up the Lobster thing https://www.prevention.com/food-nutr...elty-and-food/
Last edited by 134841422; 3 weeks ago
1
reply
TheNamesBond.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by Megxn0)
Animals like Deers and pigeons are shot for their meat, without being stunned. How would you ban that?
We’re not talking about deers and pigeons here, it’s clear it is easier to shoot them, I am against deer hunting and pigeons on the other hand are killed by bullets as well, so needless to say there’s no way to combat that unless you ban pigeon hunting or what not, my main focus here is slaughter houses.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (35)
14.34%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (21)
8.61%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (50)
20.49%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (35)
14.34%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (30)
12.3%
How can I be the best version of myself? (73)
29.92%

Watched Threads

View All