Norway -one of the most anti semitic countries on earth

[CMike]

Lueger famously coined that phrase that he decides who's a jew. You know like CMike.

How incredibly witty. :no:

My condemnation is for those jews who defend anti semitism.

To me that's even worse than non jews who defend anti-semitism.

 

[CMike]

Yes, it's hypocritical that they allow hunting, but not shechita. However, that doesn't mean that they should legalize shechita, it means that they should ban hunting.

There is no such thing as humane slaughter. If it's not humane to do towards innocent humans, then it's not humane to do towards innocent animals of other species.

If Norway is anything like Sweden when it comes to the range of food products, then it's really easy to be a vegetarian there. If kosher slaughter is about being humane towards the animals, then what's more humane than not slaughtering them at all? Does not the first book of the Torah say that the original state of humanity was vegetarianism?

Since there current method of "stunning" creates more pain for the animal than schechting, shouldn't they ban the sale of any meat?

Also, logically why shouldn't they ban stunning and require scheting since it causes less pain for the animal?

 

[mycorrhiza]

Since there current method of "stunning" creates more pain for the animal than schechting, shouldn't they ban the sale of any meat?

Also, logically why shouldn't they ban stunning and require scheting since it causes less pain for the animal?

The captive bolt pistol is quicker and causes less pain than shechita. They should first ban all methods that aren't instantaneous and pain free. I hope that the sale of meat is eventually banned. It's damaging towards our environment as well as cruel towards animals.

There's no such thing as humane slaughter.

 

[CMike]

The captive bolt pistol is quicker and causes less pain than shechita. They should first ban all methods that aren't instantaneous and pain free. I hope that the sale of meat is eventually banned. It's damaging towards our environment as well as cruel towards animals.

There's no such thing as humane slaughter.

How is the captive bolt pistol quicker and causes less pain than shechita?

It causes a forceful strike at the forehead.

Captive bolt pistol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The bolt penetrates the skull of the animal, enters the cranium, and catastrophically damages the cerebrum and part of the cerebellum.

That take more time than the quick, sharp, slice of the throat.

 

[mycorrhiza]

How is the captive bolt pistol quicker and causes less pain than shechita?

It causes a forceful strike at the forehead.

Captive bolt pistol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The bolt penetrates the skull of the animal, enters the cranium, and catastrophically damages the cerebrum and part of the cerebellum.

That take more time than the quick, sharp, slice of the throat.

It causes instant unconsciousness, which is why it's quicker. Machines have the potential to be faster than humans, and in this case they are.

Even after you slash the throat it takes a few seconds for the animal to lose consciousness.

 

[CMike]

It still strikes the head causing pain.

With scheting the pain is less than a second.

 

[mycorrhiza]

It still strikes the head causing pain.

With scheting the pain is less than a second.

If the unconsciousness is instant, then there is no pain. It destroys vital parts of the brain instantly, which means that there is no pain.

Pain isn't just physical. Mental pain can be just as horrible, and the animals are clearly conscious for a few seconds with shechita.

 

[CMike]

It still has to pass through the forehead into the cranium - pain.

 

[mycorrhiza]

It still has to pass through the forehead into the cranium - pain.

For maybe 0,01 seconds. It's much quicker than shechita is. Less physical pain and much less mental pain.

 

[CMike]

The pain from scheita is less than a second, and death in about 2.

That's faster than the stunning.

 

[mycorrhiza]

The pain from scheita is less than a second, and death in about 2.

That's faster than the stunning.

How is 2 seconds faster than instantly? And where are you getting 2 seconds from? That's faster than what any other source I find states. The fastest I found was the vague "a few seconds", which I would say is longer than two.

One source (well, a Jewish vegetarianism website, so it's probably biased) say that it sometimes takes up to 30 seconds.

While shechita ideally is quick, that isn't always the case in reality.

 

[CMike]

2 for death.

Less than a second for pain.

The stunning still has to penetrate through the head.

 

[mycorrhiza]

2 for death.

Less than a second for pain.

The stunning still has to penetrate through the head.

Which it does virtually instantly. It's like firing a bullet. When it comes to the quickest way to unconsciousness, the captive bolt pistol clearly is faster than shechita. Where do you get your information that it's only 2 seconds until death occurs? From what I found it takes at least a few seconds to even reach unconsciousness.

And when it comes to animal welfare, we can't just consider the slaughter, but we have to look at the whole life of the animal. There is no such thing as humanely produced meat, and if you believe that God commanded you to treat animals humanely, then eating meat simply isn't justified. Especially not when we have such easy access to vegetarian options.

I'd advise you to look into Jewish vegetarianism and veganism. There are Jewish movements opposed to shechita and in Israel there's even a vegan village.

 

[CMike]

Where do you get info that's instantaneous?

It's not. It has to penetra through the forehead and into the cranium.

With schechita you start at the vital part.

With stunning you have to get to it.

 

[mycorrhiza]

Where do you get info that's instantaneous?

It's not. It has to penetra through the forehead and into the cranium.

With schechita you start at the vital part.

With stunning you have to get to it.

You haven't answered where you got your info from. I tried google to the time it took for shechita, but I found no such thing as just 2 seconds. Everywhere I looked at the time for captive bolt pistols, though, it just said instantly.

Do you know how it works? It's like firing a gun, and as you might know the bullets of a gun travel really fast. Which means that it either destroys the brain basically instantly or induces consciousness by a blow to the head basically instantly, depending on the type. They aren't drilling it into the skull, they're firing it.

This form of stunning, when done correctly, is less painful and is also quicker than shechita. There is no reason to defend shechita from an animal rights point of view since it's clearly not the quickest way.

It was the quickest and most "humane" way when it was made part of the Jewish law, but it isn't any longer the quickest way. Religion needs to adapt with the times. If you truly care about animal rights, then you shouldn't be defending shechita or any other form of slaughter.

 

[CMike]

The less then a second of a pain comes from a neurologist I asked yesterday at my synagogue.

The cranium is hard, and people have survived headshots.

Aside from it having to penetrate the head and get to vital areas, the person has to be good enough to get into the vital areas. It takes time to get there and do the damage.

People have survived headshots.

However, nothing survives Cutting the esophagus, trachea, carotid arteries, and jugular veins in one quick incision.

That is by far much quicker. You are starting at the vital areas, rather than having to have an object penetrate into them.

It's the quickest and most painless method.

Here are some examples of people surviving headshots.

Bullet to the head can be overcome, survivors say - Health - Health care - More health news | NBC News

Gabrielle Giffords: Doctors Say Surviving Gunshot to Head is Possible - ABC News

Sgt. survives sniper round to the head | Marine Corps Times | marinecorpstimes.com

 

[mycorrhiza]

The less then a second of a pain comes from a neurologist I asked yesterday at my synagogue.

The cranium is hard, and people have survived headshots.

Aside from it having to penetrate the head and get to vital areas, the person has to be good enough to get into the vital areas. It takes time to get there and do the damage.

People have survived headshots.

However, nothing survives Cutting the esophagus, trachea, carotid arteries, and jugular veins in one quick incision.

That is by far much quicker. You are starting at the vital areas, rather than having to have an object penetrate into them.

It's the quickest and most painless method.

Here are some examples of people surviving headshots.

Bullet to the head can be overcome, survivors say - Health - Health care - More health news | NBC News

Gabrielle Giffords: Doctors Say Surviving Gunshot to Head is Possible - ABC News

Sgt. survives sniper round to the head | Marine Corps Times | marinecorpstimes.com

It seems like you're just ignoring what I write. It doesn't take time to penetrate the cranium, because it works like a gun. There's also a difference between surviving getting shot by a regular bullet from a distance and being shot by a captive bolt pistol. Just look up how it works on google or wikipedia.

You're allowed to keep believing that shechita is the most effective and least painful method, but I have found no evidence supporting your claim. I'm not getting any more out of this debate, so I am now leaving. Goodnight!

 

[CMike]

People have survived point blank shots to the head.

You have provided no evidence that a bullet to the head is less painless or more "humane" than cutting the throat in one quick motion.

 

[CMike]

How to Properly Slaughter a Cow Under the Kosher Method Shechitah

 

[Riverwolf]

It's really not your opinion that matters. Not even mine.

It's the opinion of the jews in Norway that have to deal with this.

I mentioned this earlier.

We had the Chabad orthodox rabbi of Norway speak at your synagogue . He stated the issues that jews are facing there.

In fact Alan Dershowitz stayed at his place during his diasterous visit to Norway.

Not allowing kosher food is a big problem with orthodox jews there.

They can only import small quanities of kosher meat.

Therefore, they have to start preparing months before a holiday to have kosher meat.

There is absolutely no reason for them to go through that.

Then stop yelling at us about it and start telling THEM to educate the Norwegian people about this, so they can all speak out against the government about it. I wasn't aware that this makes preparing for holidays was such a hassle, since imports into America are easy enough.

However, it's those in power that create the laws. The people in power created the law against allowing kosher meat.

It's the people in power that won't allow a pro-Israel speaker to speak in the Norway Universities.

It's the people in power that are supporting Hamas in their quest to do terrorist acts.

It's the people in power that only print anti-Israel propoganda in their newspapers.

It's the people in power who are brainwashing (allowing one side) regarding Israel in the media and universities.

The power in power have created a lot of mischief.

Are you even reading my posts? Do you know who King Olaf the Lawbreaker is?

That's very nice. However, the vast majority of people prefer meat. They shouldn't be forced to eat vegetables because of anti-semitic laws.

I say again: welcome to my world.

Or, perhaps, welcome to THE world.

No. That's beause you don't understand the issue.

It refers to a child that will committ murder.

Also the criteria to execute someone is so high in judaism that it's virtually impossible to do.

For example.

You need two witnesss to see the act.

Those witnessess had to warn the person not to do the act and the consequences seconds before he committs it.

If the entire court things the person is guilty that person doesn't get the death penalty.

A jewish court that imposes the death penalty once in 70 years is considered a blood thirsty court.

All the laws in the Torah are still in effect.

Well, I'll let Rabbis decide that.

The point is that the prime ministers represent the country.

I've never seen a leader truly represent his/her country, except MAYBE Iceland's Prime Minister, but it's easy to represent a country that has a population of 9 people.

The Queen is popular enough, I guess, but then, she doesn't have any political power. But she's why I keep asking about King Harald. In the British Commonwealth, the Queen is quite popular and does have some progressive views. She doesn't represent all the people in the Commonwealth, but she is popular enough to represent a good chunk of them.

That other people are doing it doesn't execuse what Norway is doing.

They are supporting a terrorist organiation that targets civilians for attack. Then when Israel defends itself against these attacks, they condemn Israel.

I never said it excuses them; in fact, I outright SAID it didn't excuse them, in case you missed that. I'm saying it's a problem that transcends any one country, and is something that just comes normally with politics.

I actually doubt it's even possible to not support a terrorist organization of some kind if you're a country that deals in international issues.

You can speak but you won't be heard unless you have a platform.

And now we have this thing called the "internet" which allows people to speak and be heard amongst each other.