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

[Kralizec]

Wilders opposes kosher, but has no problem with the fur industry.

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.

Unsedated slaughter has been illegal for some time, but the law allowed exceptions for religious practices. I'm undecided on the issue, but the stance is not anti-semetic just because it happens to conflict with the Torah. If there were any Aztecs around, banning human sacrifices would not be racist either.

Of course people could have anti-semetic motives for doing so, but I seriously doubt that was the case for any of the politicians involved. It was an initiative of the Animal Party. One of the parties in favour at the time was the Labour Party, then lead by Job Cohen (I don't think he's religious, but his name should give you an idea how likely it is he is an anti-semite)

[HoreTore]

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...

[Fragony]

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.

[HoreTore]

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?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

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.

[HoreTore]

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.

[Moros]

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.

[Fragony]

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.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

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.

[Fragony]

Do you have a ban on hunting as well

No ban, but it's very restricted