Geert Wilders comes out of the closet as an anti-semite

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

Not so much. In the days of yore, pork was prone to all kinds of nasty diseases and infections, so it was actually a threat to public health. Apart from that, there's been a taboo on pork because of the fact that pigs are omnivores and roll around in mud and excrement.

---

The diseases and the omnivorous nature of swine are intrinsically linked - as a rule you shouldn't eat meat eaters, and you should avoid direct contact with them. Most Europeans have taboos about eating dogs, badgers, foxes etc. it's actually quite strange that we eat pork. Until you consider how much curing most pork goes through prior to consumption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Wrong. Some time ago a law was passed to outlaw the mink fur industry in the coming years, and the PVV was one of the parties in favour.

---

That fact closes the thread IMO.

I must confess that I have no deeper knowledge of PVV's policy, and have simply lumped them into the big group called "far-right parties of Europe". In particular, I transfer the policies of the the Norwegian Progress Party to them. They may not be very similar, however.

So, to conclude, Wilders is not proven to be an antisemite. I still believe demanding animals to be unconcious before slaughter is ridiculous, however, as we allow hunting and see nothing wrong with it(at least I don't...). Opposing jewish rituals, like kosher, has been the staple antisemitism in europe for centuries, so anyone specifically targetting kosher will normally out themselves in a rather gloomy light.

That would normally go for male circumcision as well, an interesting point PVC brought up. Naturally, if all you do is oppose the jewish kind and none of the related practices, your label is crystal clear. But it can also be argued as part of a reasoning on where the right of the parents end and where the rights of the child begins. That's quite interesting, and I might bug you all with that one at a later date, particularly if I find an angle like I did for this thread...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

That fact closes the thread IMO.

I must confess that I have no deeper knowledge of PVV's policy, and have simply lumped them into the big group called "far-right parties of Europe". In particular, I transfer the policies of the the Norwegian Progress Party to them. They may not be very similar, however.

So, to conclude, Wilders is not proven to be an antisemite. I still believe demanding animals to be unconcious before slaughter is ridiculous, however, as we allow hunting and see nothing wrong with it(at least I don't...). Opposing jewish rituals, like kosher, has been the staple antisemitism in europe for centuries, so anyone specifically targetting kosher will normally out themselves in a rather gloomy light.

That would normally go for male circumcision as well, an interesting point PVC brought up. Naturally, if all you do is oppose the jewish kind and none of the related practices, your label is crystal clear. But it can also be argued as part of a reasoning on where the right of the parents end and where the rights of the child begins. That's quite interesting, and I might bug you all with that one at a later date, particularly if I find an angle like I did for this thread...

---

Usually he is accused of being a puppet of the zionist movement in Israel and the US because he gets funds from them (I assume this is true it was never proven though). Personally I think demanding excemptions from what is mandatory here, ie stunning animals, because you believe in fairytales is much more rediculous. Get with it or get out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Usually he is accused of being a puppet of the zionist movement in Israel and the US because he gets funds from them (I assume this is true it was never proven though). Personally I think demanding excemptions from what is mandatory here, ie stunning animals, because you believe in fairytales is much more rediculous. Get with it or get out.

---

Do you have a ban on hunting as well? Or do you support a ban on hunting, at least?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Do you have a ban on hunting as well? Or do you support a ban on hunting, at least?

---

That's a complex question.

You need to define "hunting" before Frags can be expected to answer it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Do you have a ban on hunting as well

---

No ban, but it's very restricted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

That's a complex question.

You need to define "hunting" before Frags can be expected to answer it.

---

I'm referring to the kind that's legal over basically all of Europe.

But meh, if you want specifics, have a go at the Moose hunt we do in Norway every autumn.

The point is that if one supports such hunting, one must assume that one is comfortable with animal lives being taken that way. If so, it seems weird that one wishes to implement restrictions in one field, but not the other. To conclude, if you support hunting, you should also support methods of slaughter which are no more cruel than hunting.

And no kind of either halal or kosher slaughter is worse than hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

The point is that if one supports such hunting, one must assume that one is comfortable with animal lives being taken that way. If so, it seems weird that one wishes to implement restrictions in one field, but not the other. To conclude, if you support hunting, you should also support methods of slaughter which are no more cruel than hunting.

And no kind of either halal or kosher slaughter is worse than hunting.

---

Well that's a bad argument. It's about the least cruel way of killing an animal in a situation. The amount of stress at slaughter house is already much more than a hundred fold that of those hunted, then we have those animals that do not die and are hooked and conveyor belted alive for production. (I'd post you some movies on animal slaughter practices that show how horrible standard practices are, especially in the US though we're not that much better) But as I said even when disregarding this, it's about the least cruel way possible considering the situation. During a hunt you don't have the same means for making the animal not suffer.

However that doesn't mean I'm pro hunting in general. Quite the contrary especially when performed as leisure. When needed for a sources of in come or food well then that's nature's nature. But if it is just a way to get away from the wife, well just go to a bar. No need to kill animals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I'm referring to the kind that's legal over basically all of Europe.

But meh, if you want specifics, have a go at the Moose hunt we do in Norway every autumn.

The point is that if one supports such hunting, one must assume that one is comfortable with animal lives being taken that way. If so, it seems weird that one wishes to implement restrictions in one field, but not the other. To conclude, if you support hunting, you should also support methods of slaughter which are no more cruel than hunting.

And no kind of either halal or kosher slaughter is worse than hunting.

---

They got an excemption because of their religion. You agree with that? These are our rules and we stun animals, basta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

They got an excemption because of their religion. You agree with that? These are our rules and we stun animals, basta.

---

We don't stun the animal while hunting. So it would seem that the jews already "play by our rules". What we want them to do, is play by rules we don't have. That seems weird.

As for the points Moros makes; I can't really see how any of that is relevant to a kosher/no kosher debate...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

We don't stun the animal while hunting. So it would seem that the jews already "play by our rules". What we want them to do, is play by rules we don't have. That seems weird.

As for the points Moros makes; I can't really see how any of that is relevant to a kosher/no kosher debate...

---

But it are rules we have, do you see any extra benefit in the animal having to be concious. That's what upsets them that they can't be sure the animal is fully concious. Should we have any patience for that I think not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I'm referring to the kind that's legal over basically all of Europe.

But meh, if you want specifics, have a go at the Moose hunt we do in Norway every autumn.

The point is that if one supports such hunting, one must assume that one is comfortable with animal lives being taken that way. If so, it seems weird that one wishes to implement restrictions in one field, but not the other. To conclude, if you support hunting, you should also support methods of slaughter which are no more cruel than hunting.

And no kind of either halal or kosher slaughter is worse than hunting.

---

What kind?

Packs of hounds? Guns? Flush to guns with dogs? Stalking?

I don't think you've given this question much thought or study.

Do you stun whales before you harpoon them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

What kind?

Packs of hounds? Guns? Flush to guns with dogs? Stalking?

I don't think you've given this question much thought or study.

---

All of them, if you'd like.

Though I do believe I answered your question with more specifics, try reading it again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Do you stun whales before you harpoon them?

---

Hooray! Someone brought up whaling!

I also fully support whaling, of course. But the rest of you dimwits seem to have a big issue with our brand of Whale Love, so unfortunately I can't use it as an argument... I doubt Wilders is a big fan of whaling, however fun it may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Hooray! Someone brought up whaling!

I also fully support whaling, of course. But the rest of you dimwits seem to have a big issue with our brand of Whale Love, so unfortunately I can't use it as an argument... I doubt Wilders is a big fan of whaling, however fun it may be.

---

That makes your fur industry-point a bit confusing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

As for the points Moros makes; I can't really see how any of that is relevant to a kosher/no kosher debate...

---

As it was a response to your point. I can't but help to feel, you just shot your own argument.

Secondly the failing of killing an animal succesfully, the stress and animals being processed alive and concious is something that is prevented or limited by sedation.

Also it's funny how we are still debating this as Frags and many other have already stated. Why would one make exemptions based on religion on the first place? It's discrimination for one. If we want everyone to be able to decide what is morally acceptable for them, then why have laws in the first place? If there are exceptions in a law there should be good reasons for it, personal moral views aren't those. The Sharia surely isn't either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

That makes your fur industry-point a bit confusing

---

Whales be fer eatin'. Foxes be fer wearin'.

I like food. I like meat. I like sea-food. I don't like being hungry. Nor do I like upper-class old hags torturing animals so they can wear expensive clothing cheaply and look like crap.

Enough of an answer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

As it was a response to your point. I can't but help to feel, you just shot your own argument.

---

Hm? You stated that the level of stress is high in the slaughterhouse. True. Kosher slaughter won't affect the level of stress though. How 'bout trying to reduce the level of stress in the slaughterhouse then? You know, making actual progress instead of symbolic action? Same goes for animals not properly slaughtered, no need to ban kosher to fix that. Both of these suggestions will increase the price of meat though, as it will mean added expensives for the meat producer. I guess it's a lot easier to pass laws which inconvenience others than laws which inconvenience ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Hm? You stated that the level of stress is high in the slaughterhouse. True. Kosher slaughter won't affect the level of stress though. How 'bout trying to reduce the level of stress in the slaughterhouse then? You know, making actual progress instead of symbolic action? Same goes for animals not properly slaughtered, no need to ban kosher to fix that. Both of these suggestions will increase the price of meat though, as it will mean added expensives for the meat producer. I guess it's a lot easier to pass laws which inconvenience others than laws which inconvenience ourselves.

---

Yes it is. Sedation helps to reduce animal suffering. Are you familiar with the concept of sedation?

Also excuse my vary late edit to my previous post, but it was dinner time while I was writing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

All of them, if you'd like.

Though I do believe I answered your question with more specifics, try reading it again.

---

I don't know anything about moose hunting, so you didn't, and lots of types of hunting are legal across Europe.

If you stalk moose the way we stalk hart then I can't see how that could possibly be cruel - the animal literally doesn't know what's hit it, it falls dead as soon as shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I don't know anything about moose hunting, so you didn't, and lots of types of hunting are legal across Europe.

If you stalk moose the way we stalk hart then I can't see how that could possibly be cruel - the animal literally doesn't know what's hit it, it falls dead as soon as shot.

---

Cruel? Of course it's not - just like kosher slaughter isn't cruel either.

As for your demand for more details on hunting - frags managed to answer just fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Cruel? Of course it's not - just like kosher slaughter isn't cruel either.

---

Not necesarily, but kosher also means that a cut gone wrong kinda changes things, because of fairytales a second cut won't be made and it can last a very mean long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not necesarily, but kosher also means that a cut gone wrong kinda changes things, because of fairytales a second cut won't be made and it can last a very mean long time.

---

Bah, with our slaughter techniques we boil a hefty amount of chickens alive, to name one example.

I still eat chicken though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Bah, with our slaughter techniques we boil a hefty amount of chickens alive, to name one example.

I still eat chicken though.

---

That's not boiling that is electrified water, it stuns them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

That's not boiling that is electrified water, it stuns them

---

Ah yes, the electrified water that's supposed to stun them. Unfortunately, quite a few of them die in that water, so what happened to "no slaugher without sedation", eh? That's one end of the scale, on the other end some come out without sedation at all, alive and kicking when they meet the whirring blades. And when the chicken is alive at the blade, they often squirm out of the way, before they finally die when they're boiled alive.

That's one way, the other is gassing them with CO2. That results in less chickens dying from what was supposed to sedate them, but even more chickens come of the chamber without sedation, resulting in the aforementioned boiling death.

Wonderful, eh? So humane, compared to those rotten joos....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Ah yes, the electrified water that's supposed to stun them. Unfortunately, quite a few of them die in that water, so what happened to "no slaugher without sedation", eh? That's one end of the scale, on the other end some come out without sedation at all, alive and kicking when they meet the whirring blades. And when the chicken is alive at the blade, they often squirm out of the way, before they finally die when they're boiled alive.

That's one way, the other is gassing them with CO2. That results in less chickens dying from what was supposed to sedate them, but even more chickens come of the chamber without sedation, resulting in the aforementioned boiling death.

Wonderful, eh? So humane, compared to those rotten joos....

---

If the shock that is supposed to knock them out of concious, kills them then the same effect was achieved. Also a good job trying to get a lot of other examples throw away the one and single important thing that is to be remember from this argument. There is no, one single reasons, why someone should be exempt from laws by basis of religion. You're discriminating. You're making people unequal. A personal system of believes or morals shouldn't result in your personal law. Psychopaths might believe they were right in killing people, maybe they think God wants them too. Sure that may be different and a ridiculous example, but where draw the line.Official religions? That would make a mess and would discriminate the atheïsts for one. Also when does what rule apply, converting to other religions for mild punishments,...?

HoreTore you are being ridiculous and you know it. God, I hope you know it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

If the shock that is supposed to knock them out of concious, kills them then the same effect was achieved. Also a good job trying to get a lot of other examples throw away the one and single important thing that is to be remember from this argument. There is no, one single reasons, why someone should be exempt from laws by basis of religion. You're discriminating. You're making people unequal. A personal system of believes or morals shouldn't result in your personal law. Psychopaths might believe they were right in killing people, maybe they think God wants them too. Sure that may be different and a ridiculous example, but where draw the line.Official religions? That would make a mess and would discriminate the atheïsts for one. Also when does what rule apply, converting to other religions for mild punishments,...?

HoreTore you are being ridiculous and you know it. God, I hope you know it.

---

I'm not arguing for religious exemptions, I'm arguing that the method of slaughter called kosher meets the "humane" standard and is a perfectly fine way to kill an animal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I'm not arguing for religious exemptions, I'm arguing that the method of slaughter called kosher meets the "humane" standard and is a perfectly fine way to kill an animal.

---

Sorry to butt in, but I'm surprised you're still arguing about it. Seriously, who gives a crap? Wilders is entitled to think that kosher method is inhumane while other methods are. That doesn't make him an antisemite in any way, shape or form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Sorry to butt in, but I'm surprised you're still arguing about it. Seriously, who gives a crap? Wilders is entitled to think that kosher method is inhumane while other methods are. That doesn't make him an antisemite in any way, shape or form.

---

The main method of persecution of jews in Europe has always been to target their various rituals. The blood jews, the well poisoners, etc.

Thus, a European majority representive targetting jewish rituals should naturally be examined closely.

In Detroit they say: "Nigga please."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I'm not arguing for religious exemptions, I'm arguing that the method of slaughter called kosher meets the "humane" standard and is a perfectly fine way to kill an animal.

---

Well apparently the Dutch disagree and apparently so did the Norse. And if the majority of the Dutch feel that way it is logical and normal that they decide to put it in law. That's democracy. Whether or not you agree. Cuius regio, eius leges.

It has no point in arguing what you find acceptable. I'm sure you know what you find and don't find acceptable. No relevancy to the Dutch our their legislation, nor to any Dutch politician. If it's yourself and your personal views you want to be the subject of thread, you should put that into the title and or the opening post. ~:)

Edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

The main method of persecution of jews in Europe has always been to target their various rituals. The blood jews, the well poisoners, etc.

Thus, a European majority representive targetting jewish rituals should naturally be examined closely.

---

Only be making exceptions to laws, do you target people, silly. Also I believe you were not debating those?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

Also I believe you were not debating those?

---

Read post #82 to see the end of the points in the OP, read posts #83 and #84 to see the new point being debated.

As for your thoughts on democracy, I will only note that you made Stalin blush with your collectivist views...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I will only note that you made Stalin blush with your collectivist views...

---

Jelly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

Jelly?

---

Nah, I'm only collectivist when it comes to economics ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Nah, I'm only collectivist when it comes to economics ~;)

---

And you are allowed to teach!? Heavens me. Catholic schools help our children!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Ah yes, the electrified water that's supposed to stun them. Unfortunately, quite a few of them die in that water, so what happened to "no slaugher without sedation", eh? That's one end of the scale, on the other end some come out without sedation at all, alive and kicking when they meet the whirring blades. And when the chicken is alive at the blade, they often squirm out of the way, before they finally die when they're boiled alive.

That's one way, the other is gassing them with CO2. That results in less chickens dying from what was supposed to sedate them, but even more chickens come of the chamber without sedation, resulting in the aforementioned boiling death.

Wonderful, eh? So humane, compared to those rotten joos....

---

We are really talking about different things here, it's not about the jews it's about the animals. If they don't like having their special treatment because of religious rules being revoked there is this mythical place called 'somewhere else'. They can still import it if they insist on kosher. I am pretty sure only a very small amount of jews are upset about this 100 or so max, the rest munch porkchops like the best of us. If you want to see orthodox jews in the wild you have to go to our southern neighbours.

No idea what you mean with boiling death by the way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Whales be fer eatin'. Foxes be fer wearin'.

I like food. I like meat. I like sea-food. I don't like being hungry. Nor do I like upper-class old hags torturing animals so they can wear expensive clothing cheaply and look like crap.

Enough of an answer?

---

Do you need to eat whales? No. Is it rare and therefore exclusive (and probably expensive. If it's cheap then things get even more fun)? Yes.

You're doing what they're doing, only appealing to your taste buds, instead of sight and touch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

No idea what you mean with boiling death by the way

---

Chickens are boiled after chopping its head in order to remove its feathers. If it avoids the blade, then it's still alive when it's boiled. No chance of escaping that part alive though, that's a definite end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

Do you need to eat whales? No. Is it rare and therefore exclusive (and probably expensive. If it's cheap then things get even more fun)? Yes.

You're doing what they're doing, only appealing to your taste buds, instead of sight and touch.

---

Rare? Exclusive? Expensive? Whale beef?

See, this is what you get for being born in the east bloc, where you can't have any fun on the seas. Whale beef has been considered very cheap food for ages, a lot of it fed to animals. Under the level of cod, in other words.

Due it not being possible to produce it on the industrial scale required nowadays, however, it has fallen out of use. There have been some attempts during the last decade to reintroduce whales as a "normal" dinner, but it's a long way from catching on.you do get it in plenty of stores, but since it's not a big hit you mostly get it frozen(as you can't sell it fast enough to keep it fresh), further limiting its viability.

A shame really, since I like the taste...

Whales(certain kinds) are an enviromentally sustainable resource, and in a hungry world there's no point in letting viable resources rot away. Much better to have it fill our bellies than rot in the ocean. Overfishing is a problem, but overfishing is a problem for every fish resource. The stock needs to be regulated heavily, like all other fish is. If that's done sensibly, I see no reason not to man the harpoons. And speaking of fish: how is the "all animals should be sedated before they're killed"-motto doing in that business?

10% of the moose being shot is only wounded, but that doesn't stop me from eating moose.

I make other animals suffer and die so I can eat well and live. More people should be aware of that fact, instead of living in the illusion that the meat they have on their plate is produced by rainbows, sunshine and sparkling stars. I believe that will create a society with a healthier respect for food and the animals we eat.

'Chickens are boiled after chopping its head in order to remove its feathers'

You mean after chopping of it's head it's soul is still dancing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

'Chickens are boiled after chopping its head in order to remove its feathers'

You mean after chopping of it's head it's soul is still dancing?

---

No. I've said it already, but I'll repeat it:

Some chickens are not properly sedated. When that happens(and it could also happen while sedated, but that's rare), the chicken squirms out of the way of the blade. Thus, the head is still attached and the chicken alive and kicking when it gets to the next stop on the line, which is to boil it and remove the feathers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No. I've said it already, but I'll repeat it:

Some chickens are not properly sedated. When that happens(and it could also happen while sedated, but that's rare), the chicken squirms out of the way of the blade. Thus, the head is still attached and the chicken alive and kicking when it gets to the next stop on the line, which is to boil it and remove the feathers.

---

I worked in a chicken factory as you call it, head goes first and it's impossible that the water doesn't stun them, it would knock out anyone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I worked in a chicken factory as you call it, head goes first and it's impossible that the water doesn't stun them, it would knock out anyone

---

This parliament bill explains that jittery birds as well as shorter birds often avoid the electric bath, thus avoiding the sedation. I can try digging up an english-language source if you want.

The commonly stated percentage of birds who are not sedated is about 1%. In Norway, that means about 1000 birds are boiled alive every day.

Enjoy your chicken tikka tonight ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

This parliament bill explains that jittery birds as well as shorter birds often avoid the electric bath, thus avoiding the sedation. I can try digging up an english-language source if you want.

The commonly stated percentage of birds who are not sedated is about 1%. In Norway, that means about 1000 birds are boiled alive every day.

Enjoy your chicken tikka tonight ~;)

---

They go completely underwater that is total bull you have there.

On the subject of animal cruelty and slaughter you rather might want to aim your arrows at the US of A.

Google/youtube KFC Chicken slaughter house (ignore Pamela) or Cruelty at New York's Largest Dairy Farm.
Of course there's a wealth of related videos as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moros

On the subject of animal cruelty and slaughter you rather might want to aim your arrows at the US of A.

Google/youtube KFC Chicken slaughter house (ignore Pamela) or Cruelty at New York's Largest Dairy Farm.
Of course there's a wealth of related videos as well.

---

I already know about factory farming.

This is one of the points I've made in this thread: if you care about animal welfare, factory farming techniques is the place to start, not kosher slaughter.

@Fragolini: three things cause boiling live chickens at slaughterhouses:

1. Jittery chickens evading the bath
2. Short chickens not being dipped
3. The voltage in the bath not being sufficient enough to stun them properly

These are all extremely well documented, saying that it doesn't happen is, to use your language, bull.

Another point is of course how nice it is for the chicken to hang upside down or being pumped full of growth hormones.

Calling kosher "inhumane" while pretending our way of handling animals is all fine and dandy is laughable. Btw, another thing I support is clubbing baby seals(and not the kind where to hang out in bars). The seals have lives several times better than a western cow, clubbing them are among the most humane ways to handle animals.

I think Frag's point is that in his slaughterhouse the chickens are fully immersed in water and that there's no chance any of them avoiding the shock. Maybe Dutch and Norse companies do things differently.

As for other issues with the meat industry, the point is moot unless (and I'm not aware of this) kosher and halal butchers use a different source of animals than the rest of the meat industry.
However you could argue that the method of slaughtering pales in comparison to the unpleasant existance animals have in the industry, both regular and religious, so that a marginal improvement in slaughtering is a drop on a hot plate for animal welfare while OTOH it significantly affects religious communities. Which is why I'm undecided on the issue itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I think Frag's point is that in his slaughterhouse the chickens are fully immersed in water and that there's no chance any of them avoiding the shock. Maybe Dutch and Norse companies do things differently.

---

I know that's the point he's making. Thatbwould still be subject to cause #3, however. It may well be that you dutchies have different slaughterhouses than we do(and our biggest one uses gas, btw). It seems that immersing the chicken in water solves #1 and #2, but that's not something I can comment on, not being familiar with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

As for other issues with the meat industry, the point is moot unless (and I'm not aware of this) kosher and halal butchers use a different source of animals than the rest of the meat industry.
However you could argue that the method of slaughtering pales in comparison to the unpleasant existance animals have in the industry, both regular and religious, so that a marginal improvement in slaughtering is a drop on a hot plate for animal welfare while OTOH it significantly affects religious communities. Which is why I'm undecided on the issue itself.

---

That's precisely the argument I'm making.

You are taking as you please you are not interested in any argument it seems

'so that a marginal improvement in slaughtering is a drop on a hot plate for animal welfare while OTOH it significantly affects religious communities. Which is why I'm undecided on the issue itself.'

You surprise me there Kraz, since when should one give a crap about it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

You surprise me there Kraz, since when should one give a crap about it

---

Minorites, as they belong to the group "people in general", should be allowed to live their lives as they please, unless there are heavy arguments against their practice.

If you don't see any heavy arguments against it, then the default answer is to allow it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Minorites, as they belong to the group "people in general", should be allowed to live their lives as they please, unless there are heavy arguments against their practice.

If you don't see any heavy arguments against it, then the default answer is to allow it.

---

It not being allowed is a pretty hard argument. It's just not allowed here to not sedate animals. I am glad this moronic excemtion for people who believe in fairytales is gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

It not being allowed is a pretty hard argument. It's just not allowed here to not sedate animals. I am glad this moronic excemtion for people who believe in fairytales is gone.

---

Is the basis of the nation that everything is allowed unless prohibited, or is it that everything is prohibited unless allowed?

And in general, that something is the law is of course not an argument in favour of said law. You need to use an actual argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Is the basis of the nation that everything is allowed unless prohibited, or is it that everything is prohibited unless allowed?

And in general, that something is the law is of course not an argument in favour of said law. You need to use an actual argument.

---

Argument is simple, no special treatment.