EU Court upholds Belgian ban on kosher and halal slaughter

[Altfish]

"An advocate general, Gerard Hogan, said in September that the CJEU should strike down the Belgian ban. He cited that the 2009 E.U. law that animals should be stunned before being slaughtered has an exception for religious animal slaughter—an exception that Hogan said exemplified the E.U.’s belief in freedom of religion." - from the article

I think that exemplifies the core of the discussion. The question if stunning is more humane or not is a side show. The real debate is whether religions are exceptional and deserve privileges is what it's about.

There should not be exceptions for religious beliefs. It opens a whole can of worms.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I wasn't making any argument that kosher/halal slaughter is better, you just read that in there. I was just making the case that the other alternative is not any better in a lot of respects and to hold it up as some kind of standard seems bizarre to me when it can be and often is not as great a method as folks like to think.

Again with the strawman. No one is claiming that stunning is perfect. The claim is that it is more humane. That is why if people disagree actual statistics are needed. Yes, there are botched stunnings and I am sure that the results can be rather horrific. But that does not mean that halal and kosher methods are any better. People directly involved with stunnings are not necessarily the best witnesses. Empathetic people can remember the failures and largely ignore the successful cases. So once again, the plural of anecdotes is not evidence. If people want to change this reliable statistics must be used. Not emotional arguments.

 

[Secret Chief]

Nah, I don't buy this demonization of us carnivores.
I'm in favor of killing them & eating them.
But I say it should be done in a manner a free of agony as practical.
I don't even fundamentally object to Jewish or Islamic methods.
But if there's a better way, I'd prefer it.

Read the report.

 

[Rival]

But that does not mean that halal and kosher methods are any better.

I literally just told you that this is NOT what I'm arguing.

Geez, all I did was point out that I agree with a poster and gave a reason why.

How is pointing out that stunning doesn't always work an 'emotional argument'? Especially any more than 'kosher slaughter shouldn't be used because the animal suffers'? The latter is much more emotion based.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry to be that guy but...why slaughter animals in the first place? It's completely unnecessary to most of our survival. It's just a way of satisfying our taste buds.

The answer is in your post. And we are evolved to be omnivores. This is a problem that will likely eventually be solved with technology. Right now animal slaughter is not going away for quite some time. The practical and proper approach is to minimize suffering.

 

[JustGeorge]

I have no concrete evidence to offer via links or articles, but a friend of mine briefly worked in a meat packing plant. He quit after a week, saying the methods were not humane, what they tell the public about what goes on and what actually goes on isn't really what happens, and he couldn't listen to those poor animals scream anymore... (It was a Tyson plant.) I know very little about the religious practices regarding animal slaughter, but I am certain commercial is inhumane.

I was already with @Estro Felino and vegetarian, but it made me cringe to hear his stories.

 

[Secret Chief]

This is a problem that will likely eventually be solved with technology.

Problem? The "problem" can be "solved" next meal time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The reality of abbatoirs is that killing is not humane. Disagreeing over methods by anyone who eats meat is hypocritical or, at best, based on ignorance. It just seems like attempted political/religious point scoring (eg the Daily Mail being outraged at Halal slaughter - like they give a ****).

"Each day around 100,000 cattle, sheep and pigs are slaughtered for food in the UK, as well as 2 million chickens a day. No one ever asks whether these animals are being slaughtered humanely. Sadly, often they are not, largely because animals are hustled through modern abattoirs at such great speeds that it is very difficult to safeguard their welfare.
...
CIWF Trust believes that one of the principal problems (which will be referred to at various stages of this report) for cattle, sheep and pigs and for poultry is the danger of animals regaining consciousness during bleeding-out."

- Compassion in World Farming report.

https://www.ciwf.org.uk/media/5161334/animal_welfare_problems_in_uk_slaughterhouses_2001.pdf

You mean the report that is clearly against halal and kosher slaughter?

"CIWF Trust is opposed to the religious slaughter of animals (including poultry) where such slaughter means that the animals are not pre-stunned. It is the failure to stun to which CIWF Trust is primarily opposed; clearly we are not opposed to aspects of religious slaughter which have no adverse impact on the welfare of the animals such as the requirement of Islam that the name of Allah must be invoked at the time of slaughter"

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have no concrete evidence to offer via links or articles, but a friend of mine briefly worked in a meat packing plant. He quit after a week, saying the methods were not humane, what they tell the public about what goes on and what actually goes on isn't really what happens, and he couldn't listen to those poor animals scream anymore... (It was a Tyson plant.) I know very little about the religious practices regarding animal slaughter, but I am certain commercial is inhumane.

I was already with @Estro Felino and vegetarian, but it made me cringe to hear his stories.

I have watched videos of halal and kosher slaughter and it does not appear to be any better.

 

[SigurdReginson]

The reality of abbatoirs is that killing is not humane. Disagreeing over methods by anyone who eats meat is hypocritical or, at best, based on ignorance.

Yah, no.

If I didn't care about causing undue suffering were I to go hunting or fishing, I would be a terrible human being. I'd rather be "ignorant" and "hypocritical" than that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Problem? The "problem" can be "solved" next meal time.

Nope, I have a pound of hamburger thawing. Too late for that. And on a more serious note a vegan approach is not practical for most. The change that you want to happen is not going to occur with a fundamentalist attitude.

 

[Revoltingest]

Read the report.

It doesn't appear to address my post.

 

[Secret Chief]

I have no concrete evidence to offer via links or articles, but a friend of mine briefly worked in a meat packing plant. He quit after a week, saying the methods were not humane, what they tell the public about what goes on and what actually goes on isn't really what happens, and he couldn't listen to those poor animals scream anymore... (It was a Tyson plant.) I know very little about the religious practices regarding animal slaughter, but I am certain commercial is inhumane.

I was already with @Estro Felino and vegetarian, but it made me cringe to hear his stories.

Unsurprisingly, mental health problems are common in abbatoir workers. But then given how often "rare" cases of unnecessary abuse of the animals is made public, forgive me if I'm not succeeding in generating much compassion for them.

 

[Secret Chief]

It doesn't appear to address my post.

You are correct it is long and would have no effect on your attitude.

 

[SigurdReginson]

I have no concrete evidence to offer via links or articles, but a friend of mine briefly worked in a meat packing plant. He quit after a week, saying the methods were not humane, what they tell the public about what goes on and what actually goes on isn't really what happens, and he couldn't listen to those poor animals scream anymore... (It was a Tyson plant.) I know very little about the religious practices regarding animal slaughter, but I am certain commercial is inhumane.

I was already with @Estro Felino and vegetarian, but it made me cringe to hear his stories.

I can corroborate that. I had a friend who worked in a slaughter house, and I came over to see him so we could go hang out. What happens there is... horrible.

 

[Augustus]

I think that exemplifies the core of the discussion. The question if stunning is more humane or not is a side show. The real debate is whether religions are exceptional and deserve privileges is what it's about.

True, if meat eaters cared that much about animal welfare in meat production they could support laws that would have far more impact than this one. That they don't speaks to what you note.

Another way to frame that question would be: is it ethical to make minor regulatory changes on issues with only a small impact on animal welfare when such decisions would have a major negative impact on minority cultures to the extent they could no longer practice their culture (especially one in particular which has been historically persecuted).

It's not uncommon to grandfather in clauses to protect existing groups from harms after all.

Or could make kosher/halal meet an extra animal welfare clause to 'offset' the harms, but it's not really about that is it.

 

[Secret Chief]

Nope, I have a pound of hamburger thawing. Too late for that. And on a more serious note a vegan approach is not practical for most. The change that you want to happen is not going to occur with a fundamentalist attitude.

Reducing meat consumption IS practical for many people. And many (in the UK) are doing that.
random example:
Tesco targets 300% rise in vegan meat sales

 

[Revoltingest]

You are correct it is long and would have no effect on your attitude.

That sounds sort of dismissive, but you're absolutely correct.
I like meat. I'm willing to have animals die for this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It doesn't appear to address my post.

Actually it seems to. The group does give some stats on deaths of both stunned and unstunned slaughters. That is what led them to make this statement when comparing the two:

"CIWF Trust is opposed to the religious slaughter of animals (including poultry) where such slaughter means that the animals are not pre-stunned. It is the failure to stun to which CIWF Trust is primarily opposed; clearly we are not opposed to aspects of religious slaughter which have no adverse impact on the welfare of the animals such as the requirement of Islam that the name of Allah must be invoked at the time of slaughter"

Obviously from their stats even though the appear to be opposed to slaughter in general it appears to be their opinion that kosher and halal butchery is less humane. I too am for the most humane method of slaughter possible. As I tell those in favor of kosher and halal slaughter: "Demonstrate that your method is more humane and I will support you." The religious aspect has nothing to do with it for me either way.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Reducing meat consumption IS practical for many people. And many (in the UK) are doing that.
random example:
Tesco targets 300% rise in vegan meat sales

I agree with that. But that is a non sequitur in this discussion.