Denmark bans religious slaughter

[boyfriday]

Given that such an overwhelming majority of halal meat is pre-stunned in this country I'm at a loss as to why animal welfare activists calling for a ban on slaughter without stunning is seen as anti-Muslim.

 

a) Animal rights activists are hardly regarded fondly in Europe (ie no one takes a blind bit of notice of what muesli eaters say)

b) The ban is a reaction to tabloid pressure, not animal welfare activism.

c) Not many people are aware (or want to believe) that the vast majority of halal meat is pre-stunned (90% according to the RSPCA)

d) The calls for banning religious slaughter come amid a general anti Muslim backdrop.

e) Kosher slaughter is the unintended casualty of this ban, since most objectors aren't Jewish so banning religious slaughter is no loss to them.

[altus]

a) Animal rights activists are hardly regarded fondly in Europe (ie no one takes a blind bit of notice of what muesli eaters say)

 

The EU rules say that stunning should precede slaughter but allows national governments to allow exceptions for religious purposes. If animal rights activists are being ignored, it's the national governments that are doing it.

 

b) The ban is a reaction to tabloid pressure, not animal welfare activism.

The Danish government says it's after years of campaigning from animal welfare activists and various articles seem to agree. e.g. This one in the Economist:

The move was welcomed by many Danes, who think that causing unnecessary suffering to animals on their journey from farm to dinner table is a throwback to darker times.

and when Poland reintroduced it's ban:

The pressure to ban ritual slaughter in Poland has come largely from animal welfare groups

c) Not many people are aware (or want to believe) that the vast majority of halal meat is pre-stunned (90% according to the RSPCA)

Which emphasises the point I was making in a previous post. The vast majority of Muslims eat meat that has been pre-stunned - they don't consider it sufficiently important for it to be a religious issue with them.

 

d) The calls for banning religious slaughter come amid a general anti Muslim backdrop.

That's "come amid" not "are cause by". If something is wrong it should be stopped regardless of the backdrop. Or do you think the calls for greater efforts to stop FGM be ignored because of a general anti Muslim backdrop?

 

e) Kosher slaughter is the unintended casualty of this ban, since most objectors aren't Jewish so banning religious slaughter is no loss to them.

Only if you assume that all those supporting the ban are only doing so because they are anti-Muslim and aren't in anyway concerned about animal welfare.

[boyfriday]

The EU rules say that stunning should precede slaughter but allows national governments to allow exceptions for religious purposes. If animal rights activists are being ignored, it's the national governments that are doing it.

Please altus, animal rights activists have been derided as 'beardie lefties' for decades and ignored by the majority, it's rather ironic that they now find themselves bedfellows with the EDL etc.

The Danish government says it's after years of campaigning from animal welfare activists and various articles seem to agree. e.g. This one in the Economist:

and when Poland reintroduced it's ban:

All that's happened is that populist opinion has made politicians sit up and listen.

Which emphasises the point I was making in a previous post. The vast majority of Muslims eat meat that has been pre-stunned - they don't consider it sufficiently important for it to be a religious issue with them.

Interesting point, however I do wonder whether the eaters of pre-stunned halal meat are in the majority Muslim. I know from a professional affiliation that commercial halal slaughterhouses will more easily sell their product into supermarkets, chain restaurants and public bodies if they can claim it's been pre-stunned, without labelling the end user would never know. I've bought halal meat in the past, not because its halal but because it's cheaper.

 

That's "come amid" not "are cause by". If something is wrong it should be stopped regardless of the backdrop. Or do you think the calls for greater efforts to stop FGM be ignored because of a general anti Muslim backdrop?

Not at all. However FGM is a relatively new phenomenon in Europe, religiously slaughtered meat isn't, so it's interesting that the tide of opposition against it almost corresponds to the increase in anti Islamic feeling.

Only if you assume that all those supporting the ban are only doing so because they are anti-Muslim and aren't in anyway concerned about animal welfare.

I don't think I ever suggested that. Personally, I'd prefer to eat pre-stunned eat myself, but wouldn't refuse meat that hadn't been pre-stunned either.

 

But it is ironic that those on the nationalist right and the popular tabloids (usually anti Islam) have been banging this drum now for a couple of years and the bans ensue.

 

It doesn't necessarily mean a ban is wrong, but I will simply not support something which has such grievously xenophobic undertones without full and proper research being carried out about the treatment of livestock during the slaughter process, the methods employed to stun and how this information is communicated to consumers..it might result in a ban on meat production altogether..not that the vested interests would ever allow that.

[altus]

It doesn't necessarily mean a ban is wrong, but I will simply not support something which has such grievously xenophobic undertones without full and proper research being carried out about the treatment of livestock during the slaughter process, the methods employed to stun and how this information is communicated to consumers..it might result in a ban on meat production altogether..not that the vested interests would ever allow that.

 

I'm uncomfortable with the xenophobic undertone myself. It would be much better if we could have this debate without it. Discussing slaughter methods is always going to be about which is the least worst option and any attempt at objective research will always open up accusations of bias due to vested interests. I'd certainly support labelling of meat as pre-stunned or not to allow people to decide. That might also reduce some of the 'halal meat being fed to school kids' type hysteria if people get used to seeing food labelled halal and pre-stunned - the far right do try to associate halal with definitely not stunned. Jewish organisations are against that though because they think it would make their abattoirs uneconomic - people would just import cheaper kosher meat from abroad.

[boyfriday]

I'm uncomfortable with the xenophobic undertone myself. It would be much better if we could have this debate without it. Discussing slaughter methods is always going to be about which is the least worst option and any attempt at objective research will always open up accusations of bias due to vested interests. I'd certainly support labelling of meat as pre-stunned or not to allow people to decide. That might also reduce some of the 'halal meat being fed to school kids' type hysteria if people get used to seeing food labelled halal and pre-stunned - the far right do try to associate halal with definitely not stunned. Jewish organisations are against that though because they think it would make their abattoirs uneconomic - people would just import cheaper kosher meat from abroad.

 

I agree re your point about the 'least worst option', but as of now we don't know what that is with any certainty, there's merely an assumption about stunning based on a few bits of research and the 'horror' of pubic opinion which requires placation in order to justify our unjustifiable love of meat.

[psynuk]

I agree re your point about the 'least worst option', but as of now we don't know what that is with any certainty, there's merely an assumption about stunning based on a few bits of research and the 'horror' of pubic opinion which requires placation in order to justify our unjustifiable love of meat.

 

look at those two links I posted, you can witness the cow going limp at the stun. And the cow moving after the throat slit (no stun).

Even if it hinged on dignity alone the halal method would lose.

 

What you just said is akin to saying there's no reason render unconscious for major (animal) surgeries.

[boyfriday]

What you just said is akin to saying there's no reason render unconscious for major (animal) surgeries.

 

Interesting point you raise because the halal method of stunning via a light electrical current is intended to render the animal unconscious but not risk killing it (they refer to it as being able to 'return to pasture'). They rejected the captive bolt method because it was too extreme, often killing rather than stunning.

 

Would you use a captive bolt to anaesthetise an animal undergoing surgery?

[mafya]

I will not be buying any Danish bacon in protest at this ban!

[boyfriday]

I will not be buying any Danish bacon in protest at this ban!

 

A peculiar self sacrifice for a Muslim

[psynuk]

Interesting point you raise because the halal method of stunning via a light electrical current is intended to render the animal unconscious but not risk killing it (they refer to it as being able to 'return to pasture'). They rejected the captive bolt method because it was too extreme, often killing rather than stunning.

 

Would you use a captive bolt to anaesthetise an animal undergoing surgery?

 

no, and I take your point. I've only bothered to watch the videos I linked to so I don't have a wide set of sources for comparison.

I'm not sold on the electrocution vs bolt though, But at that point it really is arguing the toss, as moments later their getting their blood drained regardless.

 

To me it seems very pointless to suddenly become concerned about an animals last moments alive, It's a token gesture either way considering whats coming next and that their whole reason for existing is to die.

 

Personally I'd say there probably isn't a better way to soothe delicate peoples conscience, so at least in that sense the true followers of the halal method have some honesty about what their doing. I suppose the same could probably be said for 'normal' abattoir workers as well if their only doing bolt cause of politics.