Advanced search

Non-stun slaughter of food animals

(14 Posts)
rhenders Thu 05-Mar-15 18:44:31

Hi all

I know this is a sensitive subject and this post is in no way racial or anti religion but I strongly object to food animals being slaughtered without stunning for ANY reason.

To me it is a question of ethics (hence why I am posting here), my personal ethics are, if an animal must be killed then it should be done so in the most painless way possible.

Mine is not a knee jerk reaction as I have researched this quite a lot before deciding and it all gels for me.

My partner has a petition running on and if anyone has the time to read it through and maybe sign it then I would be very grateful.

I want to say again so that no one can accuse me of anything, i have no problem with anyone's race or religion, my objection is the pain the animals are put through.

Thanks everyone

The petition is here >>

EauRouge Thu 05-Mar-15 19:08:17

I don't agree with not stunning animals either, but I'm not signing anything to do with UKIP. Sorry.

PigletJohn Thu 05-Mar-15 19:33:51

I have seen religious slaughter used as an excuse to attack one or other religion recently.

The attackers I have seen focus either on Jewish, or on Islamic slaughter, depending on their prejudices.

rhenders Thu 05-Mar-15 21:47:04

well as I said in my message, I do not care about race or colour, religion or faith but I do care about animals.

EauRouge Fri 06-Mar-15 07:16:46

I'm not convinced that animal welfare is UKIP's motivation for wanting to end no-stun slaughter.

GobblersKnob Fri 06-Mar-15 07:23:31

Tbh I'm not sure non stun slaughter is a million miles worse than stunned slaughter, both are hideous in terms of what the animal goes through, why anyone thinks either is even vaguely acceptable or tolerable is beyond me.

Why not vote with your feet (and plate) and just stop eating meat, full stop?

SevenAteNine Sun 24-May-15 06:07:22

Exactly. There is brutality at the end of any meat animal's life. Stunning or death by a fast cut still have the same effect.

SevenAteNine Sun 24-May-15 06:11:34

I notice that the avatar of the man who set the petition up has a big cross through the word Halal. Call me a cynic, but I believe the motivation for this is racial rather than any special concern for animal welfare.

AvocadoLime Sun 24-May-15 06:15:27

So why start/spread a petition which is aimed a party with only one seat?

FWIW I suppose if people must kill animals for food it should be the less painful way, but I'm on the veggie bus with PP.

Charis1 Sun 24-May-15 06:17:49

As far as i know, most halal and kosher meat is stunned before slaughter, so why is there still some animals that are not?

LiDLrichardsPistachioSack Sun 24-May-15 06:21:29

Just stop eating meat!
You're kidding yourself if you think stunning before slaughter is all fine and dandy for the animal.
Slaughterhouse workers have been known to be sadistic with the stun gun towards the animals as well.

Charis1 Sun 24-May-15 06:26:41

What about the suffering of badgers in the recent culls, none of them were stunned first.

They were hunted down and slaughtered in habitat that had been theirs for millennia.

Why? to prop up an unsustainable population of an animal that we have artificially introduced, that never can and never will be stable, and is contributing to world food problems, and to environmental problems.

I haven't touched beef since, and have cut back on diary, and am looking to phase that out of my life as well.

specialsubject Mon 29-Jun-15 10:39:42

you don't know (no-one does) if it is less painful for an animal to have its throat slit, to be stunned, to be electrocuted.

eating meat means killing animals. Don't like it - don't eat meat.

slippermaiden Mon 29-Jun-15 10:44:44

I'd sign this but not if its to do with UKIP

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now