-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Animal Sacrifices - are they ever ok?
- Thread starter 1137
- Start date
My opinion is that this is never justifiable.
SpeaksForTheTrees
Well-Known Member
What you mean like flushing it down the loo or something ?
160 million farm animals alone where slaughtered today , creatures nearly equal to ourselves .Countless other victims also , in the bigger picture I don't think sacrificing your goldfish would make much difference
That's actually one of the more interesting lines of thought here. People do something akin to animal sacrifice daily, using their "blood" for money. Yet I'm not a vegetarian.
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
It's unsettling when you come face-to-face with cognitive dissonance like this: slaughtering animals purely for food purposes is okay, killing them for religious reasons and feasting on the meat afterwards is not okay.
That's something I have to reconcile in my head.
That's something I have to reconcile in my head.
Personally, I'm okay with ritual animal sacrifice, since when traditions are followed, the animal in question is treated FAR better than food animals are treated nowadays, and the killing is swift.
I find it contradictory to be okay with factory farming, yet not be okay with ritual animal sacrifice. I think the only reason the latter is so taboo, at least in Western culture, is because of internalized Christian-based phobias of anything perceived as "pagan".
I find it contradictory to be okay with factory farming, yet not be okay with ritual animal sacrifice. I think the only reason the latter is so taboo, at least in Western culture, is because of internalized Christian-based phobias of anything perceived as "pagan".
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Totally fine with animal sacrifice, providing it abides by the following:
1. The animal should be killed quickly and cleanly. No burning, mutilation, torture etc.
2. The animal shouldn't go to waste. Normally I'd suggest that eating the animal makes the most sense.
3. The animal should have been given a good life before it's killed. Battery farm conditions are unacceptable in my opinion.
I'll echo Riverwolf's thoughts that it makes little sense to eat meat, but not be OK with animal sacrifice (assuming the restrictions above are in place). In fact, I'd go one further and say that sacrifice is potentially a better means of interacting with the animals we eat. At least that way you're actually consciously aware of the fact that you're taking a life to fulfill your own needs.
1. The animal should be killed quickly and cleanly. No burning, mutilation, torture etc.
2. The animal shouldn't go to waste. Normally I'd suggest that eating the animal makes the most sense.
3. The animal should have been given a good life before it's killed. Battery farm conditions are unacceptable in my opinion.
I'll echo Riverwolf's thoughts that it makes little sense to eat meat, but not be OK with animal sacrifice (assuming the restrictions above are in place). In fact, I'd go one further and say that sacrifice is potentially a better means of interacting with the animals we eat. At least that way you're actually consciously aware of the fact that you're taking a life to fulfill your own needs.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Only if..
1.) they are killed quickly and humanely.
2.) they're eaten afterwards.
1.) they are killed quickly and humanely.
2.) they're eaten afterwards.
I personally have, and will continue, to sacrifice goats. The preparation is nine days prior, where we feed it a diet of oats, honey, mead and just generally whatever we've found that our little friend happens to like. He or she is treated as well as we can manage, and if it's a male goat that includes some lady-goats he takes a fancy towards, with them given the same treats and care he is(albeit no mead or alcohol in general). One of us stay with him/her all hours of the day to make sure they're doing well, free to roam wherever they want(well within the enclosure, but it's pretty damn big and goats aren't exactly ones who like to stray to begin with).
On the day of the sacrifice we give him more alcohol, to get him, well, plastered. Then we give him an anesthetic. We don't want them to feel any of it. I then take my seax(which I should point out, is made of obsidian, or volcanic glass, and is thus sharper than 99% of surgical blades) and slit its throat, and then curve towards the back to clip the spine. He's dead in less than a second.
Mmm. I'm going to present some food for thought quoted from something I read recently:
Basically, there is a crap ton of prejudice and bigotry (even racism) surrounding the idea of non-human animal sacrifice. But I particularly liked the bold line.
"As of publication date over 140 news articles have been published in the last 72 hours focusing on Invictus’ sacrifice of the goat. There are a number of religions that practice some form of ritual animal killing, slaughter or sacrifice. However, the mainstream press regularly treats all forms of ritual sacrifice as outlandish and barbaric. Many comments claim Invictus’ ritual killing of an animal makes him unfit to hold office, while others point out the hypocrisy of being horrified by animal sacrifice while dining on factory meat.
Some people have condemned the act as “Satanic witchcraft,” while others call for Invictus to be killed. If Invictus was a Muslim sacrificing a lamb during Hajj or a Jewish person sacrificng a rooster the day before Yom Kippur would the media coverage and reader reaction be different?"
(from The Wild Hunt reporting on Augustus Sol Invictus and the Libertarian party)
Some people have condemned the act as “Satanic witchcraft,” while others call for Invictus to be killed. If Invictus was a Muslim sacrificing a lamb during Hajj or a Jewish person sacrificng a rooster the day before Yom Kippur would the media coverage and reader reaction be different?"
(from The Wild Hunt reporting on Augustus Sol Invictus and the Libertarian party)
Basically, there is a crap ton of prejudice and bigotry (even racism) surrounding the idea of non-human animal sacrifice. But I particularly liked the bold line.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Are you referring to people suggesting the animal shouldn't be wasted? If so, I can give my own perspective on it, though I can't speak for the others.
To me, our very existence is destructive. In order to survive we must cause harm, no matter how eco/animal friendly you try to live. Even without getting into diet we cause others to die so that we can live. We take up space other animals need to survive. Our day to day life reaps a huge toll on the environment. Hell, on a cellular level our bodies are a warzone of single cell organisms.
If I were to perform an animal sacrifice (something I haven't actually done before) at least some part of that process would be in recognition of this. One thing dies so that another can continue to live. It's the cycle of nature and something that I find beautiful, horrifying and absolutely worthy of reverence.
Skwim
Veteran Member
As a gut reaction to animal sacrifice I'm inclined to say it's unjustified; however, when I consider my reaction to killing animals for food, which I see as justified, I recognize that I'm simply assigning a greater value to food than to religious ritual. And, in as much as one can survive without either---neither being absolutely necessary for life---neither reason trumps the other. So, I'm driven to support animal sacrifice, principally because I like eating meat too much to give it up.
That's not what s/he is saying. I think you maybe missed what s/he was getting at.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure it's justification for destruction so much as it's recognition of our destructive nature. I'm going to kill other things just by living, whether I intend to or not. In this context an animal sacrifice would be a means of accepting that fact if that makes sense?
Now the topic of eating meat in general is perhaps something for another thread. To summarise my view on it though, I see humans as just another part of the food chain. I'm happy to eat meat while accepting that some day I'll die and be consumed in turn. Going back to the topic of the cellular world, bits of me are being killed and eaten as we speak. An odd thought isn't it?
Why sacrifice sentient beings, living breathing animals. What purpose is served by such sacrifice?
I pose this as a person who is an active omnivore, who has killed and eaten what I killed, and who on occasion makes offerings to the various embodied and unembodied spirits that live around me.
Why kill?
I pose this as a person who is an active omnivore, who has killed and eaten what I killed, and who on occasion makes offerings to the various embodied and unembodied spirits that live around me.
Why kill?
Dinner?
Truly, historical animal sacrifice was basically ceremonial preparation of a meal or feast, only done in honor of something. I mean, here in America, we practice animal sacrifice annually with a federal holiday. It's called Thanksgiving. Well, I suppose most of us don't kill our turkeys directly anymore. But basically the same idea.
So, why kill an animal to have a feast. Is it not possible to have a feast, in celebration, without killing one animal?
Of course it is. But most of us are, as you put it, "active omnivores." Celebrations around food and meals are ancient. And, one way or another, all of them involve killing, as we are obligate consumers, not producers.
That's biologically impossible, unless you want to genetically engineer humans to be plants. Which I absolutely approve of. I totally want to be a plant.
Oh, I agree. I was just trying to expand on what I thought @Strategic Philosopher might be bringing up.