Berberis Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Weren't you defending fox hunting not so long ago? I defend fox hunting because I know the fox does not suffer an agonising death, compared to ALL other methods of dealing with problem foxes. A sentiment shared by many ex members of the League Against Cruel Sports and associated hunt saboteurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 We cant start making unfounded accusations about our own methods, which are designed to prevent the suffering of the animals, in order to excuse the methods used by specific religious groups that do not care about the welfare of the animal. Its precisely this kind of argument that cripples any form of progress. Even if our own methods are not perfect, they are by far more humane and to ignore one because the other is similar to a degree is plain stupid. This is precisely why we get nowhere in this country. We cannot progress because of these kinds of arguments, that lets face it are designed to derail any form of discussion. I'm not making 'unfounded accusations'. Conventionally slaughtered cattle is stunned by being placed in a cage and having a steel bolt fired into its head. The paragraph in the article I cut and pasted was referring to the halal method of pre-stunning not being sufficient enough (even though tests state otherwise)-it just seems a case of fake indignation to highlight the halal method of stunning without referring to the conventional method at the same time, the reader could be forgiven for believing the livestock is sung a lullaby before being bled. Frankly, provided the meat is pre stunned I couldnt give a monkey's how it's been done, since I cant put myself in the position of a beast that's about to have it's skull penetrated by a bolt or stunned by means of electricity, neither seems a particularly uplifting experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladydrake25 Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 If people do their research properly they would know two things. One - meat in the UK that is classed as halal isn't actually halal. Two - Halal slaughter, if practised properly is the cleanest, less painful way of butchering an animal. Animals must not be killed in front of other animals. This is to cause less distress to other animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 I defend fox hunting because I know the fox does not suffer an agonising death, compared to ALL other methods of dealing with problem foxes. A sentiment shared by many ex members of the League Against Cruel Sports and associated hunt saboteurs. Well now you're justifying a controversial activity because you believe it controls the fox population, when in reality it's the most brutal form of animal cruelty imaginable-and they don't even eat the bloody thing! What do you think Reynard would say, given the choice-to be chased to exhaustion by a pack of pursuing hounds, then torn to shreds by them when captured, or to have his throat cut by someone skilled in the use of a knife? Neither is good, but if he could speak I bet he'd opt for the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 I defend fox hunting because I know the fox does not suffer an agonising death, compared to ALL other methods of dealing with problem foxes. A sentiment shared by many ex members of the League Against Cruel Sports and associated hunt saboteurs. :hihi:I know it's sick to mock the afflicted, so I won't, for once! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 If people do their research properly they would know two things. One - meat in the UK that is classed as halal isn't actually halal. Two - Halal slaughter, if practised properly is the cleanest, less painful way of butchering an animal. Animals must not be killed in front of other animals. This is to cause less distress to other animals. I listen to the experts. Halal and Kosher slaughter 'must end' The method of animal slaughter used by Jews and Muslims should be banned immediately, according to an independent advisory group. The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), which advises the government on how to avoid cruelty to livestock, says the way Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals. ref: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2977086.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Well now you're justifying a controversial activity because you believe it controls the fox population, when in reality it's the most brutal form of animal cruelty imaginable-and they don't even eat the bloody thing! What do you think Reynard would say, given the choice-to be chased to exhaustion by a pack of pursuing hounds, then torn to shreds by them when captured, or to have his throat cut by someone skilled in the use of a knife? Neither is good, but if he could speak I bet he'd opt for the latter. Do some research boyfriday instead of sitting in your armchair acting as an expert. Tell me, many many rats are killed by the council, should we eat them too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 I listen to the experts. Halal and Kosher slaughter 'must end' The method of animal slaughter used by Jews and Muslims should be banned immediately, according to an independent advisory group. The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), which advises the government on how to avoid cruelty to livestock, says the way Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals. ref: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2977086.stm I think the Jewish folks are in a difficult position, since any form of pre stunning isn't kosher, whereas 90% of halal meat in the UK is. http://www.ciwf.org.uk/news/compassion_news/plea_on_unstunned_halal_and_kosher_meat.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hard2miss Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Although the article is critical of both, the main focus is on Kosher, where pre-stunning isn't permissible. However it's a little disingenuous to talk about pain and suffering of the animal, when conventionally slaughtered cattle are stunned by means of a cartridge bolt fired into their skulls which often fails to have the desired effect so is done again. "Most halal butchers now use some stunning, but the RSPCA warns that it is at a much lower dosage to guarantee the animal is still alive when it is killed – so it doesn't properly protect them from pain." If we are genuinely concerned about animal welfare we can't get mealy mouthed about one method stunning over another-we should all become vegetarians in that case. Now I fail to believe this statement as there would be just as much a pa-lava about this as slitting an animals throat without stunning and the problem would be addressed, otherwise why be concerned enough to stun an animal in the first place if it could not be carried out correctly ?. I will look on google to see if it 'often' fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Do some research boyfriday instead of sitting in your armchair acting as an expert...a patronising reply has the whiff of someone unsure of their argument serapis. Tell me, many many rats are killed by the council, should we eat them too? ..my reference to eating the fox was clearly a joke, wasn't it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.