|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:00 isM wrote:On June 29 2011 10:53 Whitewing wrote:
The religions have no good reason to follow through on this, other than "lol tradition and religion." Animals not being tormented as they are being slaughtered is so far ahead of religious traditions in my book on the priority list that it's not even funny.
Screw the religious traditions.
[quote]
No, the major reason most people dislike religion is that it's idiotic, poisonous, has no logical reason for it whatsoever, and it gets in the way of human development and progress. Religion for most is just a guide to a fulfilled life. Yes some people take it to extremes but you take anything to extremes and you are equally idiotic, poisonous and illogical. You cannot assume the views of a select few are matched by the masses either or you are no better than what you are trying to fight against. No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way.  My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people.
That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say?
I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting.
If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason.
|
the poll is misleading. Slitting an animals throat isn't exactly inhumane torture. It is quick and painless
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:39 hobosrus wrote:
the poll is misleading. Slitting an animals throat isn't exactly inhumane torture. It is quick and painless
It's not that quick, and while it's not THAT painful, you are essentially suffocating the animal by preventing it from breathing. While conscious, that's extremely distressing, like drowning.
|
On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:00 isM wrote:
[quote]
Religion for most is just a guide to a fulfilled life. Yes some people take it to extremes but you take anything to extremes and you are equally idiotic, poisonous and illogical. You cannot assume the views of a select few are matched by the masses either or you are no better than what you are trying to fight against.
No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason.
Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not.
|
On June 28 2011 23:07 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2011 23:04 Dispersion wrote:
Separation of church and state, US will never do anything about it.
Damn constitution. By what you just said, isn't the government obligated to eliminate the practice religiously killed animals from its books ? I don't think you're quite getting the concept of Show nested quote +"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
that law allows freedom of religion, it doesnt seperate church and state
On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:
[quote]
No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not.
Oh really? So we couldn't judge whether human sacrifice is good if there is a religious tradition that demands it?
People outside of the circle are much better at observing the shape... In fact, I would call an external scientists perspective better for analysing religion than a religious person...
I voted the tradition, just because I hate PETA [even if that has nothing to do with it]. If there was an option for "religion does not get an exception to the law", I would have gone with that instead
|
Why would someone favor animal wellfare instead of some religions tradition? I find the poll result quite surprising. Its their traditional practice after all, let them do it.
If you feel for the animal, just quit eating meat all together then. For me, I have no problem with whatever method they use to kill animals as long as they don't torture them to death.
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:
[quote]
No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not.
Again, you jump to another strange conclusion that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I never said anything about separating them. I said values that are based on religious reasons are bad values to hold. On the other hand, values based on actual reasons, with evidence, facts and data to support those values are good. You don't need to separate them, what you should do as an individual, and as a culture and as a people is look at the values you hold and decide whether you actually have good reasons to hold those values or not.
More on topic: the reasons they have for having to kill the animals in that way are not good reasons, thus, that is a bad value to hold. On the other hand, requiring that animals to be put to sleep before you butcher them has several good reasons for it, so that's a good value.
And your disdain for science just shows your ignorance.
|
On June 29 2011 15:48 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:
[quote]
You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you?
What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not. Again, you jump to another strange conclusion that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I never said anything about separating them. I said values that are based on religious reasons are bad values to hold. On the other hand, values based on actual reasons, with evidence, facts and data to support those values are good. You don't need to separate them, what you should do as an individual, and as a culture and as a people is look at the values you hold and decide whether you actually have good reasons to hold those values or not. And your disdain for science just shows your ignorance.
I'm not disdaining Science, i'm disdaining your science.
|
Wow this is a long discussion already. Personally, I don't care about halal/kosher food. What I do care about is good policy. This is not 'good' policy. Why not? Well since it is supposedly aimed at increasing animal welfare. What will this policy accomplish? Not much. Sure the law single-handedly killed off the halal/kosher meat industry in the Netherlands. But this does not mean people will eat less of it, therefore we will merely see an increase in importing halal/kosher. So the net result, if we assume the prices are the somewhat the same, is just that some butchers in the Netherlands will either do it 'under the counter' without any regard for animal welfare except their own moral scrutiny or become unemployed. We will start importing more which worsens our balance of payments a bit and as much animal cruelty will happen as before. Only now it will happen about two hours drive away from us.
I've been going through this thread and most of it is pointless bickering between people with different morals, but if you look at the law from a rational standpoint you should see it is kind of pointless.
(just as the bickering below :D )
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:50 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:48 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:
[quote]
Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that.
It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not. Again, you jump to another strange conclusion that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I never said anything about separating them. I said values that are based on religious reasons are bad values to hold. On the other hand, values based on actual reasons, with evidence, facts and data to support those values are good. You don't need to separate them, what you should do as an individual, and as a culture and as a people is look at the values you hold and decide whether you actually have good reasons to hold those values or not. And your disdain for science just shows your ignorance. I'm not disdaining Science, i'm disdaining your science.
.... At this point, I don't think you even know what you're talking about. It's pretty clear you don't even know what science is, as a discipline and as a method.
|
@Samhax:
And your totally unable to understand what he actually writes/means (which he isn't stating 100% clearly to be fair).
|
On June 29 2011 15:53 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:50 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:48 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:[quote] It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is. I shall enlighten you: A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence. In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not. Again, you jump to another strange conclusion that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I never said anything about separating them. I said values that are based on religious reasons are bad values to hold. On the other hand, values based on actual reasons, with evidence, facts and data to support those values are good. You don't need to separate them, what you should do as an individual, and as a culture and as a people is look at the values you hold and decide whether you actually have good reasons to hold those values or not. And your disdain for science just shows your ignorance. I'm not disdaining Science, i'm disdaining your science. .... At this point, I don't think you even know what you're talking about. It's pretty clear you don't even know what science is, as a discipline and as a method.
Yeah i don't know science, and? Because you know what science is, it makes you better than me?
|
Yes, that makes him clearly better than you.
|
On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:00 isM wrote:On June 29 2011 10:53 Whitewing wrote:The religions have no good reason to follow through on this, other than "lol tradition and religion." Animals not being tormented as they are being slaughtered is so far ahead of religious traditions in my book on the priority list that it's not even funny. Screw the religious traditions. Isn't the intolerance for others view's the same reason you guys dislike religion? This comes off as hypocritical to me, Halal/Kosher butchering is designed to virtually eliminate suffering from the animal. I cannot understand why people believe its okay to insert morals from only one side of an issue. No, the major reason most people dislike religion is that it's idiotic, poisonous, has no logical reason for it whatsoever, and it gets in the way of human development and progress. Religion for most is just a guide to a fulfilled life. Yes some people take it to extremes but you take anything to extremes and you are equally idiotic, poisonous and illogical. You cannot assume the views of a select few are matched by the masses either or you are no better than what you are trying to fight against. No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them.
@Velr
Well he is saying we shouldn't respect religious tradition because of science, evidence, etc. And i gave him an example why it's bad to think like that because it leads to a false superiority feeling. That's my point.
Edit:
Yes, that makes him clearly better than you.
Good to know.
|
I don't care either way, because neither animal welfare (at least with regards to killing method) nor religious customs are important to me.
If animals potentially don't have good muscles because of confinement, or are loaded with a bunch of antibiotics and/or disease making the meat different, then those are important "animal welfare" issues, but not the method of killing.
You think honey badger cares how he treats his prey? hell nawwww - we should learn from that.+ Show Spoiler +
Overall the knifes are maybe a bit more messy, and potentially more dangerous or slow? but all that is pretty small considering that stunning still needs to cut also. The stunners are more expensive, but don't know of any other downside. Not a big deal either way IMO, but probably leaning a bit to stun.
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:56 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:53 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:50 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:48 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:45 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:37 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:25 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:18 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 15:13 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:
[quote]
Yes, you can, and yes, I do. All the time. The fact that you actually think this way shows you have no understanding of what logic, reason, and science actually are, and don't understand what a value is.
I shall enlighten you:
A value is something that you hold to have worth, merit, and importance. Since your values are based in some form of reasoning on your part, the obvious question is why you hold those things as valuable to you. On the one hand, we have made up ideas like religion, and on the other we have actual scientific reasoning and logical conclusions based on reasonable arguments constructed from facts and evidence.
In other words, values should be derived from facts, data, and evidence. If they aren't, you have absolutely no good reason to hold those values.
Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. Your logic leaded us to colonization, slavery and genocide. Please think before talking about traditions and religion. You just jumped to a completely invalid conclusion, which is a poor use of logic. I never said using logic poorly was better than religion, I just said religion is bad. Of course it's possible for people to make bad decisions and do wrong and evil things, or hold no decent values without religion. What's your point? It is possible for non-religious things to be bad too, I never said ONLY religion is bad. People are capable of doing evil deeds with and without religion. The important thing, is that when you are trying to do the right thing (which the events you describe were not, although what's wrong with the idea of colonization? Some turned out badly, but there's nothing wrong with the concept itself), that you do it for good reasons, or else you might easily wind up doing the wrong thing. Read, think, then post. You said we shouldn't respect traditions and religion of other people because of science, evidence, bla bla bla. Do you know why Europeans countries did colonize Africa, India, etc. Because they weren't respecting other cultures, other traditions and other religions, for them it was dumb people with dumb culture, and white people were going to learn them how to think and how to live. And you think exactly like this people. That's not at all what I said, learn to read and think before you start accusing other people of being genocidal or of being slavers. The only reason I'm not horribly insulted by your moronic post is that it makes no sense at all. You not only managed to completely misunderstand and miss the entire point, but you also have again made a massive logical leap that is completely invalid and nonsensical. You're not right, you're not even wrong. Your argument is so off the track that it's essentially indecipherable. What the hell are you even trying to say? I said values based in religion are dumb because there is no logical reason to hold those values, there is no evidence or data to support them. I did not say that all traditions and values are wrong! And again, as I said before, these people you are referring to DID NOT DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO DO GOOD OR TRYING TO BE GOOD PEOPLE. They were quite happy being evil and doing horrible things to others. I never once said that it's okay to do nasty horrible things to people if you don't think their values are worth respecting. If you have a good reason for your values, then that's fantastic! Religion is, on the other reason, NOT a good reason. Do you know that culture, tradition and religion are heavily linked and mixed? You can't separate them and you can't judge from your external fake scientist point of view what religious tradition is good and what is not. Again, you jump to another strange conclusion that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I never said anything about separating them. I said values that are based on religious reasons are bad values to hold. On the other hand, values based on actual reasons, with evidence, facts and data to support those values are good. You don't need to separate them, what you should do as an individual, and as a culture and as a people is look at the values you hold and decide whether you actually have good reasons to hold those values or not. And your disdain for science just shows your ignorance. I'm not disdaining Science, i'm disdaining your science. .... At this point, I don't think you even know what you're talking about. It's pretty clear you don't even know what science is, as a discipline and as a method. Yeah i don't know science, and? Because you know what science is, it makes you better than me?
I never once said I was better than you. I do think I *know* more than you do in this regard based on the discussion so far, but having more knowledge does not necessarily make one *better*. I believe you are genuinely trying to be a good person and support what you think is right in the best way you know how, but based on the discussion so far, you lack an understanding of what science is, which undermines your entire argument and point of view.
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I think I'm better than you.
I do believe that having a good understanding of the scientific method is very important, and unfortunately the vast majority of people on the planet (hell, even in most first world countries) do not. It might not necessarily be your fault that you don't understand it very well, so I would suggest and recommend learning about it and educating yourself with regards to what logic is (and how it functions), and what science is. If you educate yourself in this regard, you'll find that you will have a very different view of things, because you'll have a better background and understanding of how to reason properly (most people don't).
That said, I'm sure you can agree with the following statement:
"Holding values that have good reasons for holding them is better than holding values without good reasons for holding them."
That's all I've been saying this entire time.
EDIT: And yes, being educated and more knowledgeable is always better than not being educated an being less knowledgeable. It doesn't necessarily make you a better person, but it is better to be educated.
|
Sorry but I've gotta vote in favor of the animal welfare.
The "ancient Jewish and Muslim dietary laws and practices" should place more emphasis on the "ancient". No need to make the animal suffer a painful death when it can be avoided.
Maybe if I believed in their ancient traditions I might be more partial to their view, but I just don't see how it's a strong stance to take at all.
It's as much a violation of exercising one's religious freedom to outlaw this as it is to outlaw stoning children to death who disrespect their parents.
|
On June 29 2011 16:02 Samhax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:00 isM wrote:On June 29 2011 10:53 Whitewing wrote:The religions have no good reason to follow through on this, other than "lol tradition and religion." Animals not being tormented as they are being slaughtered is so far ahead of religious traditions in my book on the priority list that it's not even funny. Screw the religious traditions. Isn't the intolerance for others view's the same reason you guys dislike religion? This comes off as hypocritical to me, Halal/Kosher butchering is designed to virtually eliminate suffering from the animal. I cannot understand why people believe its okay to insert morals from only one side of an issue. No, the major reason most people dislike religion is that it's idiotic, poisonous, has no logical reason for it whatsoever, and it gets in the way of human development and progress. Religion for most is just a guide to a fulfilled life. Yes some people take it to extremes but you take anything to extremes and you are equally idiotic, poisonous and illogical. You cannot assume the views of a select few are matched by the masses either or you are no better than what you are trying to fight against. No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. @Velr Well he is saying we shouldn't respect religious tradition because of science, evidence, etc. And i gave him an example why it's bad to think like that because it leads to a false superiority feeling. That's my point. Edit: Good to know.
First, sorry for the little flame, couldn't resist there  .
No, he's not saying we should disrespect religious tradition. He says we should disrespect religious tradition when we KNOW (so 99%++ certainity) that the religious tradition is bad for some reason.
Thats a huge diffrence. Religions have changed many of their old practises/traditions over the curse of time whenever there was overwhelming, scientific, evidence that some tradition/practise was wrong/bad/untrue...
There is a reason that for instance catholicism nowadays I diffrent from what it was 200 or even 50 years ago...
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 29 2011 16:12 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 16:02 Samhax wrote:On June 29 2011 15:02 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:58 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:55 Nothingtosay wrote:On June 29 2011 11:49 KhaosKreator wrote:On June 29 2011 11:31 Whitewing wrote:On June 29 2011 11:00 isM wrote:On June 29 2011 10:53 Whitewing wrote:The religions have no good reason to follow through on this, other than "lol tradition and religion." Animals not being tormented as they are being slaughtered is so far ahead of religious traditions in my book on the priority list that it's not even funny. Screw the religious traditions. Isn't the intolerance for others view's the same reason you guys dislike religion? This comes off as hypocritical to me, Halal/Kosher butchering is designed to virtually eliminate suffering from the animal. I cannot understand why people believe its okay to insert morals from only one side of an issue. No, the major reason most people dislike religion is that it's idiotic, poisonous, has no logical reason for it whatsoever, and it gets in the way of human development and progress. Religion for most is just a guide to a fulfilled life. Yes some people take it to extremes but you take anything to extremes and you are equally idiotic, poisonous and illogical. You cannot assume the views of a select few are matched by the masses either or you are no better than what you are trying to fight against. No, what I mean is, all religion, regardless of how extreme or inoffensive it might be, is idiotic. It's dumb to believe in something and base real life decisions on that belief when there is absolutely zero evidence to support that belief. You have zero reason to believe that living is "more good" than not living, and yet here you stand. Think of all the damage you're causing to the environment by existing! All that coal and oil you consume, and the trees you cut down to build your home, and the land you occupy that could be occupied by anything else. Unless, you don't value nature over yourself, of course. But you have no reason to value anything over anything else, so why would you? What idiots indeed, having values that are consistent with their belief system. Are you serious? no reason to think that being alive is better than being dead? As far as science goes being dead = game over and I don't think the vast majority of people want that. It's true that people don't want that! But science unfortunately doesn't care either way. My point is that you can't apply "logic and science" to basic things like values. Your values have no logical basis. They wouldn't be values then, they would be facts. Since the religious traditions of any group have no basis in fact, data, or evidence, there is no good reason to hold those values, meaning respecting them is pointless and potentially harmful. So yeah, put the animals to sleep before you butcher them. @Velr Well he is saying we shouldn't respect religious tradition because of science, evidence, etc. And i gave him an example why it's bad to think like that because it leads to a false superiority feeling. That's my point. Edit: Yes, that makes him clearly better than you. Good to know. First, sorry for the little flame, couldn't resist there . No, he's not saying we should disrespect religious tradition. He says we should disrespect religious tradition when we KNOW (so 99%++ certainity) that the religious tradition is bad for some reason. Thats a huge diffrence. Religions have changed many of their old practises/traditions over the curse of time whenever there was overwhelming, scientific, evidence that some tradition/practise was wrong/bad/untrue... There is a reason that for instance catholicism nowadays I diffrent from what it was 200 or even 50 years ago...
That's pretty close, what I actually meant was that we should not respect religious tradition because religion by definition has no evidence to support it, and therefore neither does its teachings. On the other hand, if they can give a good reason other than a religious one for why they have a tradition, then it would be worthy of respect, depending on how good the reason is.
For example, I value helping other people, because of the evolutionary aspect of it (we evolved as a social species), and because I know that helping others is likely to help me at some point, and because I value the success of our species (another evolved value). I can list at least 10 reasons why I hold this particular value.
On the other hand, I've yet to find one good reason why you have to slaughter animals by cutting their throat while they are conscious.
Also, I disagree with the 99% certainty statement, I believe the United States legal requirement is sufficient: beyond reasonable doubt, which I generally place at around 70-80% certainty, assuming you can accurately quantify such things.
|
Maybe we should judge this on a scientific evaluation?
Ritual slaughter is slaughter performed according to the dietary codes of Jews or Muslims. Cattle, sheep, or goats are exsanguinated by a throat cut without first being rendered unconscious by preslaughter stunning. Ritual slaughter is exempt from the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978 to protect religious freedom.
Because ritual slaughter is exempt, some plants use cruel methods of restraint, such as suspending a conscious animal by a chain wrapped around one hind limb. In other plants, the animal is held in a restrainer that holds it in an upright position. Whether or not ritual slaughter conforms to the requirements of euthanasia is a controversial question. When ritual slaughter is being evaluated, the variable of restraint method must be separated from the act of throat cutting without prior stunning. Distressful restraint methods mask the animals’ reactions to the cut.
The author designed and operated four state-of-the-art restraint devices that hold cattle and calves in a comfortable upright position during kosher (Jewish; Fig 3) slaughter. To determine whether cattle feel the throat cut, at one plant the author deliberately applied the head restrainer so lightly that the animals could pull their heads out. None of the 10 cattle moved or attempted to pull their heads out. Observations of hundreds of cattle and calves during kosher slaughter indicated that there was a slight quiver when the knife first contacted the throat. Invasion of the cattle’s flight zone by touching its head caused a bigger reaction. In another informal experiment, mature bulls and Holstein cows were gently restrained in a head holder with no body restraint. All of them stood still during the cut and did not appear to feel it. Disturbing the edges of the incision or bumping it against the equipment, however, is likely to cause pain. Observations by the author also indicated that the head must be restrained in such a manner that the incision does not close back over the knife. Cattle and sheep struggle violently if the edges of the incision touch during the cut.
The design of the knife and the cutting technique appeared to be critical in preventing the animal from reacting to the cut. In kosher slaughter, a straight, razor-sharp knife that is twice the width of the throat is required, and the cut must be made in a single continuous motion. For halal (Muslim) slaughter, there are no knife-design requirements. Halal slaughter performed with short knives and multiple hacking cuts resulted in a vigorous reaction from cattle. Fortunately, many Muslim religious authorities accept preslaughter stunning. Muslims should be encouraged to stun the cattle or use long, straight, razor-sharp knives that are similar to the ones used for kosher slaughter.
Investigators agree that kosher slaughter does not induce instantaneous unconsciousness47,48,b. In some cattle, consciousness is prolonged for over 60 seconds. Observations by the author indicated that near immediate collapse can be induced in over 95% of cattle if the ritual slaughterer makes a rapid, deep cut close to the jawbone45. Further observations indicated that calm cows and bulls lose sensibility and collapse more quickly than cattle with visible signs of agitation. The author has observed that cattle that fight restraint are more likely to have prolonged sensibility. Gentle operation of restraint devices facilitates rapid loss of sensibility.
Cattle do not appear distressed even when the onset of unconsciousness is delayed. Pain and distress cannot be determined by measurements such as an electroencephalogram. Behavioral observations, however, are valid measures for assessing pain49. The author has observed that cattle appear unaware that their throat is cut. Investigators in New Zealand have made similar observations50. Immediately after the cut, the head holder should be loosened slightly to allow the animal to relax. The author also has observed that after the head restraint is released, the animal collapses almost immediately or stands and looks around like a normal, alert animal. Within 5 to 60 seconds, cattle go into a hypoxic spasm and sensibility appears to be lost. The spasms are similar to those that occur when cattle become unconscious in a headgate that is used for restraint in feedlots. Practical experience has shown that pressure on the carotid arteries and surrounding areas of the neck from a V-shaped headgate stanchion can kill cattle within 30 seconds.
Even though exsanguination is not an approved method of euthanasia by the AVMA1, the author has observed that kosher slaughter performed with the long, straight, razor-sharp knife does not appear to be painful. This is an area that needs further research. One can conclude that it is probably less distressful than poorly performed captive—bolt or electrical stunning methods, which release large amounts of epinephrine.
EDIT: TL;DR- Ritual throat cutting seems not to be painful to animals, although poor handling before the process can cause them agitation. In fact, with certain types of knives, it has been observed to be less disturbing to animals than boltgun-slaughter.
Source: http://www.grandin.com/ritual/euthanasia.slaughter.livestock.html
If you don't know who Temple Grandin, the author, is, look her up. She's definitely not inclined to make things up in support of slaughter anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
