|
On June 29 2011 21:04 esperanto wrote:
This law has nothing to do with animal wellfare, its only about discriminating jewish and muslim traditions while showing stupid stereotypes. The big food industry would be the first station any animal-rights supporter should protest about.
I fully agree with this statement, unfortunately we also have economics to consider.
Terrible as it is, it is just more cost effective to farm with "Battery Hens" rather than "Free range"
The same is true for every other form of meat & animal byproduct production.
There are extremes on both sides of the animal cruelty coin. Finding the balance is mostly a function of the local society in question and what that society will tolerate.
Also, unfortunately for supply to come even close to meeting demand, there is NO way we could have ALL our meat raised and killed in the most humain manner. There isnt enough room on the planet to handle enough animals in this fashion for our existing population of meat eaters.
The only way to eliminate animal suffering completely is for us to all become vegitarians... or adopt Soylent Green as a dietary alternative
|
I'm christian but I still believe their traditions should be be more priorized, the results for me reek of people not liking muslims / jews as much in general, but I have sympathy for the dudes =/
|
On June 29 2011 21:01 ShatterStorm wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 20:55 tangwhat wrote:On June 29 2011 20:49 Technique wrote:
Hehe, yeah a lot of religious people still deny evolution as well... so.... no reasoning with religious people for the most part. Thanks do you have any other bigoted statements you'd like to make about minorities? African-Americans or Socialists maybe? What minorities are you reffering too ? If you are saying that religeous people denying evolution being in the minority of church goers, you may be right, but considering they take their anti darwinism stance on advice from the mother church... and that the church itself is definately NOT a minority group...I find it hard to get your point here.
He didn't specify what religious group he was talking about. He just seems like another kid who is religiously intolerant.
I'm christian but I still believe their traditions should be be more priorized, the results for me reek of people not liking muslims / jews as much in general, but I have sympathy for the dudes =/
If halal/kosher was actually inhumane then we would actually have something to discuss and debate over. Instead we have people who don't know what they're talking about claim it's inhumane and trying to push their weird agenda of intolerance?
|
Well, I'm eating pork noodles now while having a conversation with a veggie friend of mine who is studying in a Yeshiva in Jerusalem. Funny stuff (:
Anyway he claims that the reason against shocking is that it hurts the animal and kosher schita is to be done on an uninjured animal.
On the other hand he says that many reformed are now using shock in the US and that in Israel at least, it more and more common to do the cut in a way... I didnt understand.. but basically the do the cut while moving the caddle to be upside down so it looses conciousness or something.. Didnt fully understand.
He himself is a vegetarian as most of his buddies are and they consider it a "higher" way of eating as it reduces animal cruelty almost absolutly. He claims that though it's a very slow growing thing it does catch up in the orthodox crowd.
edit: tried to make it more readable (:
|
On June 29 2011 19:46 konadora wrote:
religion is too damn important/sensitive in keeping the country and international ties stable...
That's very interesting what you're saying, but where did you get that? Does it mean that with no religions, world will become "unstable"? It would rather be true without science, but i don't understand how can it be true without religion, if you have the will to do it, i would be glad that you elaborate more 
Anyway returning to the topic, If i had a pig and i needed to kill him, i would definitely look for the painless way, to me it would seems rather a rational choice.
The argument of traditions is just ridiculous... A tradition has no empathy, neither it has common sense, it's based on beliefs and nothing else. It never evolves until the generation that carry them die off. On top of that, traditions will always be overwhelmed by necessity. So why bothering with traditions if it can avoid animal suffering?
|
On June 29 2011 21:31 paulinepain wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 19:46 konadora wrote:
religion is too damn important/sensitive in keeping the country and international ties stable... That's very interesting what you're saying, but where did you get that? Does it mean that with no religions, world will become "unstable"? It would rather be true without science, but i don't understand how can it be true without religion, if you have the will to do it, i would be glad that you elaborate more Anyway returning to the topic, If i had a pig and i needed to kill him, i would definitely look for the painless way, to me it would seems rather a rational choice. The argument of traditions is just ridiculous... A tradition has no empathy, neither it has common sense, it's based on beliefs and nothing else. It never evolves until the generation that carry them die off. On top of that, traditions will always be overwhelmed by necessity. So why bothering with traditions if it can avoid animal suffering?
Yes but the point is that the method of stunning hasn't been proven to be any more humane than that of halal/kosher. The whole point of halal/kosher is to avoid animal suffering so I don't get why people keep trying to enforce this point about "traditions are dumb". Yeah this tradition would be pretty dumb if it didn't actually do what it's intent is but fortunately it does actually minimise animal suffering.
Secondly you realise that a lot of people seek out religion on their own right? There are people who are fine with believing that there is no afterlife or some kind of deity etc etc(I'm one of them) but there are a whole lot of people who need to believe in something, anything. They can't believe in nothing because then everyone would just experience existential crises all the time and society/people would fall apart. Religion is a necessity for a lot of people so that they don't turn into manic depressives. But also religion is a pretty useful tool for those in power to control the populace. No one will argue that religion causes a lot of pain and suffering and wars and all that but it helps a lot of people and if you really think the world would be better off without religion then you probably haven't thought enough about how it would affect a lot of people.
|
On June 29 2011 21:12 GGitsJack wrote:
I'm christian but I still believe their traditions should be be more priorized, the results for me reek of people not liking muslims / jews as much in general, but I have sympathy for the dudes =/
Wich is ironic given how the two groups of people who both want this right actually can't stand each other.
|
On June 29 2011 21:13 tangwhat wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 21:01 ShatterStorm wrote:On June 29 2011 20:55 tangwhat wrote:On June 29 2011 20:49 Technique wrote:
Hehe, yeah a lot of religious people still deny evolution as well... so.... no reasoning with religious people for the most part. Thanks do you have any other bigoted statements you'd like to make about minorities? African-Americans or Socialists maybe? What minorities are you reffering too ? If you are saying that religeous people denying evolution being in the minority of church goers, you may be right, but considering they take their anti darwinism stance on advice from the mother church... and that the church itself is definately NOT a minority group...I find it hard to get your point here. He didn't specify what religious group he was talking about. He just seems like another kid who is religiously intolerant. Show nested quote +I'm christian but I still believe their traditions should be be more priorized, the results for me reek of people not liking muslims / jews as much in general, but I have sympathy for the dudes =/ If halal/kosher was actually inhumane then we would actually have something to discuss and debate over. Instead we have people who don't know what they're talking about claim it's inhumane and trying to push their weird agenda of intolerance?
If it's human to slit an animals throat and let it bleed to death then please provide a link showing that animals don't suffer from this.
|
If I thought that it made that much of a difference to the aniamls, I might support a ban. For example if the Muslim tradition was the hack off the hooves of a still living cow then flay it before killing it, yeah you bet that wouldn't be tolerated.
But this...it's a method that's been used for centuries. To my mind at least it is not cruel or unneccessarily painful for the animal; I mean they are being killed. If you can accept them being killed as not cruel, you can probably accept that cutting their throat is an ok way to do it.
|
People should try Halal and Kosher meat before voting. As a meat gourmet, i'm lucky enough to leave in a neighborhood with a very mixed population in Paris, and a sizable community of orthodox jews and lots of arab-descendants frenchs. Therefore, I had Hallal, Kosher and "french" butcheries just next to my home. Now, let's talk about taste because it is the only thing that matters.
First, the quality of the grooming of the animal has the biggest impact on the taste of the meat. In France, the muslim community is usually lower-class. For orthodox jews, things are most complex, but the orthodox community is not as rich as people usually think. Lots of kids, private religious schools and only one income (women usually don't work) means that they have a lot of expenses and not so much money. On the other hand, the slaughtering of animals in the Halal/Kasher tradition costs more because you have to take a little more time per animal. So, to be able to offer the meat at a low prize, muslim/jew butchers usually buy cull cows, usually from dairy farms. Therefore, the initial quality of the meat is average to bad.
Does the method of slaughtering change the taste of meat? Answer is of course. Fear is the first factor. Fear means that your animal is going to contract his muscled when dying. That means a less tender meat. In fact, stun machines are not used because they are painless (they aren't) but because an unconscious animal is going to loosen his muscles. The second factor is adrenalin. Adrenalin tastes awful and a scared animal tastes just less good (as a side note, if you are hunter, this explains why you should always try to kill in one shot dears, a scared hurt dear tastes fucking terrible). With the "industrial method", even if you stun them, cows are in a row so they know they are going to be killed. With the halal/kosher method, cows are individually treated, and usually, that means less fear. There will be little to no difference between the industrial or the religious method on this matter. Here, it will come down to the organization of the slaughtering house.
The last factor is blood. Halal and Kosher meat is drained. Therefore, is you want to buy minced meat, Halal meat is a bad choice as it well be almost tasteless, and with little substance. On the other hand, Halal/Kosher cow meat is slightly better because they salt the meat (making it tastier), and because the blood is factor on the fermentation of the meat. Halal meat tastes good for a little longer than your usual meat.
Therefore, if you like meat, my advice would be to buy Halal/Kosher meat if you are sure that the original quality of the animals is the same. If it is not, you should still buy your meat on an unaffiliated "traditional" butcher. It is going to be probably better that a "bad" meat well slaughtered. If you like lamb, i really advice Halal. The lamb is a little older and it gains a lot in taste (of course, i even like mutton, so take this advice with a pinch of salt).
|
On June 29 2011 22:16 Demoe wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 21:13 tangwhat wrote:On June 29 2011 21:01 ShatterStorm wrote:On June 29 2011 20:55 tangwhat wrote:On June 29 2011 20:49 Technique wrote:
Hehe, yeah a lot of religious people still deny evolution as well... so.... no reasoning with religious people for the most part. Thanks do you have any other bigoted statements you'd like to make about minorities? African-Americans or Socialists maybe? What minorities are you reffering too ? If you are saying that religeous people denying evolution being in the minority of church goers, you may be right, but considering they take their anti darwinism stance on advice from the mother church... and that the church itself is definately NOT a minority group...I find it hard to get your point here. He didn't specify what religious group he was talking about. He just seems like another kid who is religiously intolerant. I'm christian but I still believe their traditions should be be more priorized, the results for me reek of people not liking muslims / jews as much in general, but I have sympathy for the dudes =/ If halal/kosher was actually inhumane then we would actually have something to discuss and debate over. Instead we have people who don't know what they're talking about claim it's inhumane and trying to push their weird agenda of intolerance? If it's human to slit an animals throat and let it bleed to death then please provide a link showing that animals don't suffer from this.
There's a link on the first page of the thread, dunno if it's exactly a rock solid source.
http://www.grandin.com/ritual/rec.ritual.slaughter.html
|
legaton, first of all meat that is given the label halal or kosher doesn't taste any different from the same meat that doesn't have this label.
Secondly, it may be true that an animal that is in fear and has adrenaline rushing through it's veins and tenses up all it's muscles can taste different. But I heard different, what are in fact, opinions about the effect of this on taste. Some say it is bad, some say it is better.
I haven't seen the science on this but a personal experience is going to be completely useless. I really doubt the average meat eater would be able to tell the difference even if there is one.
Just imagining the better taste because you know it's on concordance with your religion despite the effort may be easy to do, especially so since you can then already imagine gods to exist, but doesn't count at evidence.
Third, this is outside the debate. You say 'taste is all that matters'. That's why there is a law banning exactly that idea. The law forbids your line of argument, even if it isn't fallacious. Not stunning was banned except for religious butchering.
|
On June 29 2011 22:18 legaton wrote:
People should try Halal and Kosher meat before voting. As a meat gourmet, i'm lucky enough to leave in a neighborhood with a very mixed population in Paris, and a sizable community of orthodox jews and lots of arab-descendants frenchs. Therefore, I had Hallal, Kosher and "french" butcheries just next to my home. Now, let's talk about taste because it is the only thing that matters.
First, the quality of the grooming of the animal has the biggest impact on the taste of the meat. In France, the muslim community is usually lower-class. For orthodox jews, things are most complex, but the orthodox community is not as rich as people usually think. Lots of kids, private religious schools and only one income (women usually don't work) means that they have a lot of expenses and not so much money. On the other hand, the slaughtering of animals in the Halal/Kasher tradition costs more because you have to take a little more time per animal. So, to be able to offer the meat at a low prize, muslim/jew butchers usually buy cull cows, usually from dairy farms. Therefore, the initial quality of the meat is average to bad.
Does the method of slaughtering change the taste of meat? Answer is of course. Fear is the first factor. Fear means that your animal is going to contract his muscled when dying. That means a less tender meat. In fact, stun machines are not used because they are painless (they aren't) but because an unconscious animal is going to loosen his muscles. The second factor is adrenalin. Adrenalin tastes awful and a scared animal tastes just less good (as a side note, if you are hunter, this explains why you should always try to kill in one shot dears, a scared hurt dear tastes fucking terrible). With the "industrial method", even if you stun them, cows are in a row so they know they are going to be killed. With the halal/kosher method, cows are individually treated, and usually, that means less fear. There will be little to no difference between the industrial or the religious method on this matter. Here, it will come down to the organization of the slaughtering house.
The last factor is blood. Halal and Kosher meat is drained. Therefore, is you want to buy minced meat, Halal meat is a bad choice as it well be almost tasteless, and with little substance. On the other hand, Halal/Kosher cow meat is slightly better because they salt the meat (making it tastier), and because the blood is factor on the fermentation of the meat. Halal meat tastes good for a little longer than your usual meat.
Therefore, if you like meat, my advice would be to buy Halal/Kosher meat if you are sure that the original quality of the animals is the same. If it is not, you should still buy your meat on an unaffiliated "traditional" butcher. It is going to be probably better that a "bad" meat well slaughtered. If you like lamb, i really advice Halal. The lamb is a little older and it gains a lot in taste (of course, i even like mutton, so take this advice with a pinch of salt).
Would you mind keeping such fantasies to yourself?
There is no demonstrateable difference in the taste of meat based on the how normal people slaughter animals and how the religious slaughter animals.
This topic is filled to the brim with falsehoods and researches headlined by hardcore muslims/jews and passed off as reasonable unbiased research. It doesn't need the ludicrous lie that the taste of meat is superior or inferior in halal/kosher slaughter.
People cannot taste the difference between kosher slaughter and normal slaughter. The minimalistical differences that exist are so small that only the foolish delude themselves into believing they can taste the difference. It is like saying you are able to taste the presence of oil when you eat the mud several miles above it.
The perceived difference in taste between halal food and non-halal food (or kosher for that matter) does not exist. It is an utter fabrication. It cannot be proven scientifically and every time a person like you claims to taste the difference he actually knows what is halal and what isn't. Expectations influence your taste. Given a blind test you would be guessing wrong 50% of the time.
|
Poor barbarians. We, french people, have trained our senses for several years to analyze the subtle differences in texture and taste of liquors and food. The Netherlands should embrace the superior slaughtering and cooking methods of the arab-descendants instead of persecuting them. Arab pastries are a simple delicious, and arab gastronomy is great thanks to its deep understanding of spices and enjoyable preparations like tajines and couscours. On the other hand, the only thing memorable from the Netherlands is Gouda, a disgusting pasteurized (!!!!!) cheese. On anything related to food, i would trust arabs over dutchmen.
|
On June 30 2011 00:48 legaton wrote:
Poor barbarians. We, french people, have trained our senses for several years to analyze the subtle differences in texture and taste of liquors and food. The Netherlands should embrace the superior slaughtering and cooking methods of the arab-descendants instead of persecuting them. Arab pastries are a simple delicious, and arab gastronomy is great thanks to its deep understanding of spices and enjoyable preparations like tajines and couscours. On the other hand, the only thing memorable from the Netherlands is Gouda, a disgusting pasteurized (!!!!!) cheese. On anything related to food, i would trust arabs over dutchmen.
What are you even talking about? Out of desperation you jump off the meat train and climb on board of the...arab pastry train? Trusting arabs over dutchmen? Could you try not to be so unstable and starting to flip out the moment your complete lies get adressed?
Atleast i am glad to you stopped defending your complete lies. You can enjoy the middle-eastern kitchen all day long, i know i do, but i don't waste time pretending like there is a difference between halal and non-halal meat.
I didn't adress your post because you like middle-eastern food, i adressed it because you made the complete false statement that religiously slaughtered meat tastes any different.
|
I'm seeing folks skimming through some people mentioning that the point of Halal Butchering is to raise and butcher in a painless way anyway. Who told you that it's inhumane. There's even this one guy that mentioned that they let the Animal bleed to death, which is outright Fabrication. Don't let your beliefs get in the way of the method its self.
I bet that if the Method didn't have an Islamic term attached to it, there would be much less complaints about it
Please don't make up facts. I've seen Halal butchering and the process takes less than a second to put the animal down.
|
to me, religion is old and so are its practices, things should be updated since we are now more knowledgeable about things, and we are more understanding than back then. We more have standards that tell us right from wrong compared to back then, they need to patch that shit asap.
edit: i can confidently and safely say, im sure god would rather they stun the animal than make it suffer, back then when bibles were written we didnt have that stun power, if jesus was alive right now he'd say stun that animal first or taste a my thunder xD.
|
On June 30 2011 01:07 Veevro wrote:
I'm seeing folks skimming through some people mentioning that the point of Halal Butchering is to raise and butcher in a painless way anyway. Who told you that it's inhumane.
The point is that an animal that is stunned suffers less. This means slitting the throat and killing it in seconds causes unneeded suffering for no advantage at all.
Also, scientific objective research done shows that in practice the animals don't die fast and that it takes 3 to 4 slices on average to kill an animal. This is contrary to what the religious people involved claim as they all claim that with a properly sharp knife and proper training the animal dies the moment it is sliced.
This is just contrary to reality. But the problem with religious people is that is their bread and butter. Gods don't exist. And their religious view on the reality of slaughtering is just as deluded. They have in their mind as a statement of faith that halal and kosher slaughtering is humane. It is their dogma. God says so. So all science on this has to be wrong.
That's how these religious people think. Luckily most religious people, jewish and muslim, already moved away from this. We are talking about what are considered extremists in our western world.
I bet that if the Method didn't have an Islamic term attached to it, there would be much less complaints about it
Please don't make up facts. I've seen Halal butchering and the process takes less than a second to put the animal down.
Yes, this is true but besides the point. If it was just the Jewish people doing this I am pretty sure PVV and VVD wouldn't have backed this law.
But why complain when xenophobia finally leads to something good?
|
On June 29 2011 07:24 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 07:17 Roflhaxx wrote:
I really couldn't care less about jewish and islamic traditions. The rest of western world has moved on from living like "god" told us to years ago. Why shouldn't they? Because they don't have to. To impose your ideals on to the ideals of other members of humanity for what? For rights of beasts? I don't see how you think beasts of consumption's well being exceeds to rights of humans to have their own culture when that culture do not harm humanity itself. As long as humanity itself remains unharmed I see no wrong in such practices. Also we must not impose such kind of ideals on to others. the last time we did that there was a crusade Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 07:23 Killrwombat wrote:
Animal rights are definitely a priority rather then accommodating religious traditions in my book. There is no reason to make an animal suffer in death, killing an animal for food is bad enough. Keeping Religious tolerance open is definitely a priority rather than Animal rights. There is no reason to make a people suffer in cultural oppression.
If someone starts suffering just because the ANIMAL (not beast) you are eating have been butchered in a humane way, I don't really feel sorry for them tbh. Really, why do you keep saying beast over and over again, I wouldn't call a cow or a chicken a beast.I'm not even gonna bother discussing the other crap you said, I don't see that you will listen to whatever I say anyway.
|
On June 30 2011 01:23 Roflhaxx wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 07:24 Blasterion wrote:On June 29 2011 07:17 Roflhaxx wrote:
I really couldn't care less about jewish and islamic traditions. The rest of western world has moved on from living like "god" told us to years ago. Why shouldn't they? Because they don't have to. To impose your ideals on to the ideals of other members of humanity for what? For rights of beasts? I don't see how you think beasts of consumption's well being exceeds to rights of humans to have their own culture when that culture do not harm humanity itself. As long as humanity itself remains unharmed I see no wrong in such practices. Also we must not impose such kind of ideals on to others. the last time we did that there was a crusade On June 29 2011 07:23 Killrwombat wrote:
Animal rights are definitely a priority rather then accommodating religious traditions in my book. There is no reason to make an animal suffer in death, killing an animal for food is bad enough. Keeping Religious tolerance open is definitely a priority rather than Animal rights. There is no reason to make a people suffer in cultural oppression. If someone starts suffering just because the ANIMAL (not beast) you are eating have been butchered in a humane way, I don't really feel sorry for them tbh. Really, why do you keep saying beast over and over again, I wouldn't call a cow or a chicken a beast.I'm not even gonna bother discussing the other crap you said, I don't see that you will listen to whatever I say anyway.
Because you are denying a people their basic constitutional rights for Animal rights. What you are is sacrificing rights of other humans for animals. Why can you not grasp the concept that humans are superior to animals? And that animal rights only matter when it does not sacrifice the rights of human beings?
And not to mention Halal is rather painless way to kill the animals already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
