We won't eat halal meat, say British MPs

[AUz]

Heh some people say its scientifically proven that halal is less painful and now you say its its based on faith. Anyways least we co do is not call the other side of the argument retarded.

Science is not "fixed" for goodness sake !!!! Yes there are researches (in Germany) which actually DID say that Kosher/Halal ritual slaughtering DOES make animal feel LESS pain (Cutting of Jugular vein stops the blood supply to the brain..animal does not feel any pain...the researchers put electrodes in two specimen..one halal slaughtered..other one stunned..The stunned one shown MORE signals or brainsignals etc ...I can post links if you want ) ...

But MY point was SOMETHING else...People say that they don't eat halal because "It is unfair to the animals" ...THIS is retarded..If you're gonna KILL and EAT a living thing..then don't talk crap about "being unfair" ...If I kill you by shooting and not by stabbing..does this make any difference? So yeah...people with SUCH views are retarded actually (until they don't eat halal for some other purposes) ...

Whereas Muslims insisting on eating halal or Jews insisting on eating halal has NOTHING to do with animals but its a 'religious belief' ..Understood?

 

[boris]

Science is not "fixed" for goodness sake !!!! Yes there are researches (in Germany) which actually DID say that Kosher/Halal ritual slaughtering DOES make animal feel LESS pain (Cutting of Jugular vein stops the blood supply to the brain..animal does not feel any pain...the researchers put electrodes in two specimen..one halal slaughtered..other one stunned..The stunned one shown MORE signals or brainsignals etc ...I can post links if you want ) ...

But MY point was SOMETHING else...People say that they don't eat halal because "It is unfair to the animals" ...THIS is retarded..If you're gonna KILL and EAT a living thing..then don't talk crap about "being unfair" ...If I kill you by shooting and not by stabbing..does this make any difference? So yeah...people with SUCH views are retarded actually (until they don't eat halal for some other purposes) ...

Whereas Muslims insisting on eating halal or Jews insisting on eating halal has NOTHING to do with animals but its a 'religious belief' ..Understood?

Very nice point.

 

[Zabaniyah]

How did you know.........if you have never eaten non-halal meat! .......OR did you taste both??

Both

 

[AUz]

Both

You ate both ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ?

You Infidel !!!!

You should be killed now !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mujraparty]

Captive Penetrating Bolt Gun Cattle Stunner - YouTube
looks painless...

 

[OrionHunter]

We prefer Jhatka to halal. I mean the jhatkas you see in Bollywood movies!!

 

[untitled]

One more fatwa for the road plz

 

[Bobshouse]

But MY point was SOMETHING else...People say that they don't eat halal because "It is unfair to the animals" ...THIS is retarded..If you're gonna KILL and EAT a living thing..then don't talk crap about "being unfair" ...If I kill you by shooting and not by stabbing..does this make any difference? So yeah...people with SUCH views are retarded actually (until they don't eat halal for some other purposes) ...

Sure it makes a difference, the difference being the amount of suffering inflicted before death. Going by your logic there is no difference between shooting somebody in the temple that torturing somebody to death, the end result is the same.

Whereas Muslims insisting on eating halal or Jews insisting on eating halal has NOTHING to do with animals but its a 'religious belief' ..Understood?

And thats the problem, the religious should take into account the animal and not just the religion. Again going by your logic what if I believed in a religion that demanded the testicles be pulled of an animal while it is still alive before killing it(believe it or not this is the belief of one religion - Look for the series "John Safron vs God" for footage on this if you dont believe me) I believe back in the day halal was probably the most humane of killing an animal. Times have now changed and there now more humane ways of slaughter.

 

[Awesome]

more religious bias... if you have scientific evidence, that would be terrific.

Why don't you refute the assertions that cutting the blood from the brain would indeed numb out the pain.

 

[Awesome]

Looking at this picture it seems more like a stun to the head of the animal.

That is a bolt gun/stun gun. It will hit the poor animal... really hard.

The concept is valid, but it ignores the initial pain that would be felt by the animal. If someone punches should really hard, breaks all your bones in the jaw, there is a chance that the pain from that would numb out the pain from say a stabbing soon after.

Ever heard of pain junkies? They inflict pain upon themselves since it releases some endorphin or serotonin (I mix those two up), which gives a temporary high.

The tirade against Halal meat is only led by either ignorant animal rights activists or generally racist Islamophobic people. The science does not support their assertions.

 

[Awesome]

SIR, EVEN NOW YOU ARE NOT GETTING THE SHALLOWNESS OF YOUR RELIGIOUS OBLIGATION? AT THE LEAST IT CAN BE SAID ILLOGICAL AND TO BE FAIR IT IS A BARBARIC PRACTISE.

IF YOU WERE A GOAT THEN I ASSUME YOU WOULD PREFER TO BE *SLAUGHTERED WITH KINDNESS. THAT IS WHAT EVERY LIVING BEING WANTS.

Your ridiculous caps lock issues aside, please conduct a civil discussion rather than pass fatwas that my religious obligation is shallow, barbaric, illogical.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Sure it makes a difference, the difference being the amount of suffering inflicted before death. Going by your logic there is no difference between shooting somebody in the temple that torturing somebody to death, the end result is the same.

Animals aren't 'tortured'.

And thats the problem, the religious should take into account the animal and not just the religion. Again going by your logic what if I believed in a religion that demanded the testicles be pulled of an animal while it is still alive before killing it(believe it or not this is the belief of one religion - Look for the series "John Safron vs God" for footage on this if you dont believe me) I believe back in the day halal was probably the most humane of killing an animal. Times have now changed and there now more humane ways of slaughter.

Prove what is more 'humane'? Times have changed? Stunning methods were used even in early 20th century.

 

[Roybot]

Whereas Muslims insisting on eating halal or Jews insisting on eating halal has NOTHING to do with animals but its a 'religious belief' ..Understood?

Sorry for badgering you, but once again what is the religious belief based on? Does this religious belief come with an explanation as to why something(slaughtering in this case) should be done in a certain way?

Most of the religious belief have a logic behind it, otherwise it becomes a superstition.

 

[Yeti]

That is a bolt gun/stun gun. It will hit the poor animal... really hard.

The concept is valid, but it ignores the initial pain that would be felt by the animal. If someone punches should really hard, breaks all your bones in the jaw, there is a chance that the pain from that would numb out the pain from say a stabbing soon after.

Ever heard of pain junkies? They inflict pain upon themselves since it releases some endorphin or serotonin (I mix those two up), which gives a temporary high.

The tirade against Halal meat is only led by either ignorant animal rights activists or generally racist Islamophobic people. The science does not support their assertions.

Some of the Scientific community have stated that stunning is the best method in ensuring the least pain to the animal:

Federation of Veterinarians of Europe took the position in 2002 that "the practice of slaughtering animals without prior stunning is unacceptable under any circumstances",



A study of the issue commissioned by the Dutch government in 2008 concluded that "ritual slaughter has a number of negative aspects for the animals when compared to conventional procedures where a stun is performed prior to slaughter".


Its findings were mirrored in a 2010 report by a consortium of scientists for an EU-funded project, which concluded that "it can be stated with the utmost probability that animals feel pain during the throat cut without prior stunning".

 

[untitled]

Some of the Scientific community have stated that stunning is the best method in ensuring the least pain to the animal:

Nowadays you can get a religious, scientific or political argument for or against any hot current topic. Depends who you are willing to believe.