Org Mobile Site
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 anyoneNo. 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.
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.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
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
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.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
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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
'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
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.You surprise me there Kraz, since when should one give a crap about it
If you don't see any heavy arguments against it, then the default answer is to allow it.
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.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.
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?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.
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.
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.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.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO