EPTBanning halal/kosher butchering - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
|
LesPhoques
Canada782 Posts
| ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:22 Thorakh wrote: I am not against religious slaughters. I am against religious slaughters that make the animal suffer with the only reason being an invisible man in the sky. If, what some people in this thread have suggested, is true and halal/koshjer slaughter is not inhumane, I have no problems with that. Perhaps it would have been prudent for you to actually research the topic before mouthing off baseless speculation and spewing insults in every direction. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:40 Aelip wrote: Slaughter = -1, why? It's good isn't it, it grants us FOOD, food we need to survive. And painful slaughter has nothing to do with anger, it's makes them feel like they're doing something right, something for the greater good, and while you may disagree, why is your opinion better than theirs? Just because it prevents some animals of potentially feeling pain. As it's been said, you believe it to be more painful, they believe the opposite, that our way it more painful, why is your opinion the right one? As long as it's all based on beliefs the discussion is frankly pointless. 'till someone proves that one way hurts more than the other, it's irrelevant, and no wikipedia is not proof. Relative morality as an argument is paper thin. Using cultural differences as an excuse for immoral behavior is not a valid argument. Maybe if butchering these animals had some demonstrable benefit to the people or was a preventative measure to prevent necessary livestock/farmland from being damaged. But they are just doing it without a valid reason. Because the bible says so, is not a valid reason to do something morally speaking. | ||
|
Tippecanoe
United States342 Posts
On June 28 2011 23:09 legaton wrote: Vegans surfing on european islamophobia to forbid all of us to eat meat what we want because the "meat industry" makes animals suffer. First they came for the Halal meat, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a muslim. Then they came for the Kosher meat, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a jew. Then they came for my meat and there was no one left to speak out for my meat. You butchered that quote! xD | ||
|
Klive5ive
United Kingdom6056 Posts
And anyway it's irrelevant, you can't go round telling the whole world what to do. I don't respect their traditions but banning it is stupid too. Why piss off a whole portion of society for no good reason? This reminds me of the BNP going round protesting about this. It has nothing to do with animal rights and everything to do with xenophobia. | ||
|
nukeazerg
United States168 Posts
| ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
Why does the slaughter of animals need to be humane? Why should animals be given humane treatment? Animals are lower than humans. They deserve to be treated like animals, not humans. Edit: I don't see why the Dutch government feels the need to impose its will on the butchers. Slaughtering the animals in this fashion is a harmless practice (to human beings, that is), so I don't know why there needs to be laws against it. | ||
|
whiteguycash
United States476 Posts
It is silly to cushion the fact that you are killing an animal with the excuse "we did it in the most humane way possible." If you are going to go for the "most humane way possible," then stop going halfway, and just don't kill it. If you are going to reap the benifits of the harvested cattle, then don't bitch about the "how to do it," when your own demands based off mass consumption demand that the death be executed in the most efficient way possible. edit: On June 29 2011 00:57 Ferrose wrote: I don't really see how killing animals in a "humane" way is really animal welfare since you are still killing the animals, but whatever. Why does the slaughter of animals need to be humane? Why should animals be given humane treatment? Animals are lower than humans. They deserve to be treated like animals, not humans. Edit: I don't see why the Dutch government feels the need to impose its will on the butchers. Slaughtering the animals in this fashion is a harmless practice (to human beings, that is), so I don't know why there needs to be laws against it. I guess its not just me. | ||
|
Zihua
Netherlands177 Posts
| ||
|
Euronyme
Sweden3804 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:22 Thorakh wrote: I am not against religious slaughters. I am against religious slaughters that make the animal suffer with the only reason being an invisible man in the sky. If, what some people in this thread have suggested, is true and halal/koshjer slaughter is not inhumane, I have no problems with that. Please atleast try to read the thread next time. Just a little. Please. There are tonnes of posts that the religious way of doing it is painless, and yet people ramble on about religion being painful and whatnot. Personally I couldn't care less. Let them do whatever the fuck they want. There are more important questions out there that requires the Dutch governments attention. Such as that they have a blantantly obvious racist as a big politician. | ||
|
smacky
United States108 Posts
do you have to show affiliation to buy them or can any gentile with a wild hair pick up some kosher pastrami...maybe some spicy mustard edit: ok this is me being serious: its not like jews and musims are going to eat unclean meat anyway so they are going to pay a premium for imported properly prepared meat. is that fair? they are still going to be eating animals that were awake when killed and then again only at a higher price and with additional tariffs applied by the dutch governement. obvious persecution. jews and muslims do not eat properly prepared meats because they thinks its cute or nice they do so to carry favor with their respective gods and lets be honest, because you dont believe in what they believe in doesnt mean you can arbitrarily make part of what they do as a part of their beliefs illegal...its perfectly asinine to suggest that they should not be allowed to kill their animals a certain way because peta freak lady gets squeamish when something gives birth. honesty if you didnt get the last reference you shouldnt be posting some convoluted moralist argument here and be expected to be taken seriously. love you all | ||
|
King K. Rool
Canada4408 Posts
I can't understand how people can support this. Seems pretty close to religious persecution. It's their culture; let them deal with animals how they want. | ||
|
moltenlead
Canada866 Posts
But I remember seeing somewhere that in a properly done halal killing the animals suffer negligible pain depending on the knife and precision of the cut. | ||
|
nennx
United States310 Posts
Would just another freedom lost because of people who try to control the way other people live | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
It did pass, roughly 120 for against 30 against.(out of an obviously 150 ''representatives''. | ||
|
Geordie
United Kingdom653 Posts
tl;dr : Leave it be. | ||
|
Saraf
United States160 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:55 Aberu wrote: + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7xt5LtgsxQ Relative morality as an argument is paper thin. Using cultural differences as an excuse for immoral behavior is not a valid argument. Maybe if butchering these animals had some demonstrable benefit to the people or was a preventative measure to prevent necessary livestock/farmland from being damaged. But they are just doing it without a valid reason. Because the bible says so, is not a valid reason to do something morally speaking. First, it is a completely valid reason for the adherents of the religion; maybe you don't think so but they would tell you that you're wrong. Second, are you arguing that butchering the animals serves no purpose? They're slaughtered for food, that is a demonstrable benefit; if you weren't, skip to point three. Third, the religiously mandated process is more humane and less painful than zapping them with a stun gun and then killing them. Sometimes there are reasons for traditions; for example, PETA introduced a method for goat castration that was supposedly "more humane" than the traditional method (cutting open the sack and pulling the testes out with your teeth). While the traditional method hurts the goats *now*, the PETA method lead to the goat suffering over the span of weeks, while the traditionally castrated goats were fine within hours. EDIT: They had a goat farming episode on Dirty Jobs; that's my source for the goat business. | ||
|
Skilledblob
Germany3392 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:58 Zihua wrote: Even considering religious tradition on this matter is against the idea of separation of church and state. Of course, in The Netherlands people don't really care about such idealist things. I'm very pleasantly surprised this might actually happen. you know it's called religious freedom. Even the netherlands should have that though with that neo nazi running around in your country this law doesnt surprise me at all. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:57 Ferrose wrote: I don't really see how killing animals in a "humane" way is really animal welfare since you are still killing the animals, but whatever. Why does the slaughter of animals need to be humane? Why should animals be given humane treatment? Animals are lower than humans. They deserve to be treated like animals, not humans. Edit: I don't see why the Dutch government feels the need to impose its will on the butchers. Slaughtering the animals in this fashion is a harmless practice (to human beings, that is), so I don't know why there needs to be laws against it. Humans ARE animals for one thing. Next we know that animals feel pain, empathy, etc... so the human species is learning to adapt our culture morally to not inflict needless pain and suffering on other living things. | ||
| ||
