Possible ban on halal/kosher meat in the Neds

[HoreTore]

There is no humane way of killing something. There are more humane ways of killing than others though. Obviously we can agree there is a difference between smashing the head with a rock repeatedly until it dies and giving it a quick electric zap to the head.

What's the difference between cutting it and letting it bleed to death(the kosher way) and scolding it alive(our way)?

[gaelic cowboy]

Bah two pages of an absolute rubbish "Oh no halal/kosher meat could be banned" boo hoo if they were all hungry enough they wouldnt give a toss where the meat came from.

[a completely inoffensive name]

What's the difference between cutting it and letting it bleed to death(the kosher way) and scolding it alive(our way)?

False dichotomy. It is not given that "our way" is scolding it alive. Do you somehow know that every slaughterhouse in Europe and North America scolds them alive?

The difference is in intent and in the pain factor. If you deny that a bullet to the head is quicker and less painful then having your head bashed in with a rock, then you have lost at living in reality.

An electrical zap that knocks the animal unconscious and disrupts breathing is quick, painless and they don't suffer as much as slicing their throats open as they hang from a cable wide awake.

It is also less malicious in intent. Killing animals to eat is not an "inhumane" action. It is nature and does not subscribe or allow itself to be applied with human concepts of humane or inhumane. Cats are not "inhumane" creatures for capturing and killing mice to eat. The act of killing the animal itself is always inhumane though and should be recognized as regrettable because we have the ability to actually think about our actions. There is a lot of nuance here that you and many others in this thread entirely skip over in order to make your general point.

We are not monsters because we eat other animals, but we can be monsters due to how we go about it. Bleeding a pig out while it hangs upside down is backwards and is obviously more pain and suffering for the animal then a usual factory farm that kills them in a quicker, more efficient pattern.

This detracts from the point I made in the first place though, which is that if this kosher way is less sanitary or healthy then normal western preparation, then the ban is fine as long as it doesn't ban the product outright.

[HoreTore]

False dichotomy. It is not given that "our way" is scolding it alive. Do you somehow know that every slaughterhouse in Europe and North America scolds them alive?

Yes, every slaughterhouse that sedates chickens with electroshocks ends up scolding quite a few of them alive. The alternative is of course to choke them with CO2, sounds like fun.

Not that I care, I bought enough chicken products yesterday to last till the end of the month. It's food, not humans.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, every slaughterhouse that sedates chickens with electroshocks ends up scolding quite a few of them alive. The alternative is of course to choke them with CO2, sounds like fun.

Not that I care, I bought enough chicken products yesterday to last till the end of the month. It's food, not humans.

My point still stands though. If a few chickens are still alive it is because of a mechanical or design problem, not an issue stemming from malicious intent.

It's like criticizing the justice system because a few guilty people got away and few innocent got locked up. There won't be any justice system that won't have that happen just as there won't be an automated slaughterhouse that will perfectly sedate every chicken.

So again the difference is, we attempt at making death as peaceful as possible for the animals out of respect while the other way has religious words whispered into the frighten pigs ear right before it feels its throat slit. The emphasis on the latter is not on the animal but the religious undertones while the focus on the western style is all about the animal. This is the crux of the matter here and I don't see what you are trying to say. Are all methods equal to you?

[HoreTore]

My point still stands though. If a few chickens are still alive it is because of a mechanical or design problem, not an issue stemming from malicious intent.

It's like criticizing the justice system because a few guilty people got away and few innocent got locked up. There won't be any justice system that won't have that happen just as there won't be an automated slaughterhouse that will perfectly sedate every chicken.

So again the difference is, we attempt at making death as peaceful as possible for the animals out of respect while the other way has religious words whispered into the frighten pigs ear right before it feels its throat slit. The emphasis on the latter is not on the animal but the religious undertones while the focus on the western style is all about the animal. This is the crux of the matter here and I don't see what you are trying to say. Are all methods equal to you?

Define "malicious intent".

The people doing it are fully aware that what they're doing results in chickens being fried alive. It's not a freak occurrence, it's the result of their actions. And they don't give a crap about that and proceed with business as usual.

If kosher slaughter is "malicious intent", how is this not the same?

[Fragony]

Define "malicious intent".

The people doing it are fully aware that what they're doing results in chickens being fried alive. It's not a freak occurrence, it's the result of their actions. And they don't give a crap about that and proceed with business as usual.

If kosher slaughter is "malicious intent", how is this not the same?

They aren't fried alive they get hauled through an electrified water pool to knock them out. Have you actually seen a slaughterhouse from the inside.

[HoreTore]

They aren't fried alive they get hauled through an electrified water pool to knock them out. Have you actually seen a slaughterhouse from the inside.

Yes, and that sedation works when the chicken is of normal height and doesn't wiggle. If it's small or wiggles, they often miss it, and they also miss the blade from time to time. No miss on the scolding though.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Define "malicious intent".

The people doing it are fully aware that what they're doing results in chickens being fried alive. It's not a freak occurrence, it's the result of their actions. And they don't give a crap about that and proceed with business as usual.

If kosher slaughter is "malicious intent", how is this not the same?

Malicious intent the way I am using it means that the culture/society in which the food is being prepared has blatant disregard for any respect towards the animals they will be eating because they have their own traditions that they feel trump any sort of acquiescence to animals they are slaughtering. Does that really apply to western factories? No, not really unless you stretch the truth a lot.

It is a freak occurrence when it only happens to 1 out of every 100 or 1000 chickens. You just said it happens to quite a few of them. Unless I am misunderstanding the term quite a few doesn't mean majority or even close to it. What you are describing isn't what the method is supposed to be. The method is supposed to be to sedate them so they don't feel pain when they are killed. That shows that the culture respects the animal even when it is implemented badly. Purposely slicing it when it is still awake and not caring just because it is religious tradition and "god wants it that way" is malicious to the animal because they are purposely refusing to respect the animal.

Also, workers at the factory who don't care != society. The religious communities want to adhere to kosher rules and don't care about the animal or how much it feels pain. Western factories have government mandated and culturally acceptable ways of attempting to lessen or negate the pain for the animal. Just because the process might actually suck and actually does hurt a lot of the animals and just because the workers themselves might not care because they are desensitized from working there doesn't mean that suddenly both groups are on equal footing. One group is taking measures, the other group isn't.