To absolutely loathe the increase in smear campaigns against businesses because of the halal meat debate?

Bloody ridiculous. If he doesn't want to serve halal meat, fine. If he does, also fine. No need to egg him. Ridiculous

Ill stick with the old testament because thats Gods original laws.

Jesus said himself i have not come to change anything but to fulfil the will of him who sent me.

In mark 5, he says I have not come to abolish any laws.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. Mark 5.17.

Jesus cant come and change what God has decided.

There is a reason why this is. Pork is dirty and harmful. Pigs eat their own poo. They also will happily drink the urine straight out of a pig. Proof is on YouTube. Pigs can also have hepatitis and tapeworm. Pigs also eat other pigs and basically anything. Also you can see this on YouTube that if you pour coca cola on raw pork it causes maggots to rise, still alive, wiggling around. That's because flies are attracted to poo. When you see dogs mess on the street theres usually flies on it. The flies lay their eggs/maggots in the poo and they are still alive.
Also sausage comes from the entire pig that means its brain, eyeballs, genital, anus, bowels, liver, snout the lot are in a hot dog. Ill stick with the original teachings of the old testament and evidence I have seen to support this. I cant and will not go against Gods teachings. I also dont believe jesus would ever eat pork. He had a clean diet.

Speak for yourself and not all atheists.

You’ll have to accept you have your own feelings on this but you can’t order it for others.

If someone if bothered by words then I would argue they are not a true atheist.

To be upset by words they have to have ascribed meaning for the person who is upset.

An atheist, by definition, does not believe in God(s) or religion, so therefore does not ascribe meaning to the words whether they come from the Koran, the Torah, the Bible, a Charles Dickens novel or any other source of words!

@areyoulisteningyet , absolutely not! Neither is acceptable in my opinion.

I was wondering this. New Testament has primacy over Old Testament for Christians.

Additionally, yes, eating offal such as liver is a practice that has been going on for centuries, and probably much longer, in Europe and elsewhere in the world.

'Nose to tail eating' has recently become more prominent again as a movement to cut waste, and it is arguably more respectful to the animal not to waste a part of it, if you are going to slaughter and eat it.

@BigYellowBus , nope! I don’t think either are acceptable.

If Pagans needed to slaughter an Ox as a key tenant of their religion, The Pagan Federation or the UK Pagan Council could lobby for an exemption to the Welfare at the Time of Killing (England) Regulations 2015 (WATOK) just like Muslim and Jewish organisations have.

And there is nothing to stop people who practice Voodoo from ritually killing chickens on their own property as that is perfectly legal in the UK!

To you. Not everyone feels the same way.

Why are you quoting the Old Testament when there is a New Testament verse that supersedes it?

But it wouldn't bother an atheist - which I am.

As long as the animal welfare element is taken care of, anything else is just words or ceremony - as an atheist, I don't care, because I don't believe that those words have any meaning.

Yep do the full list. No one has to explain further why they either buy it or don’t.

Absolutely.

Many of us have campaigned for decades and have spent as long trying our best to make ethical choices in how we buy eggs, fish and meat.

It's always wise to inform yourself before jumping to a conclusion.

Yeah think something on the door. But that's now attracting him customers. Someone also went and cleaned off the eggs for him

If demand drops, then the market will respond.

No problem with that at all.

It's the moving goal post of the argument - if the objection is because of cruelty then people need to educate themselves that the majority of halal meet is no more cruel than non-halal meat.

If that is the true concern then actually the labelling wouldn't even need to mention Halal or Kosher - it would just need to say Pre-stunned or Not pre-stunned.

Labelling as Pre-stunned, Pre-Stunned Halal, Non-Pre-Stunned Halal or Non-Pre-Stunned Kosher would ensure that those who wish to select their meat based on their religious leaning or based on their animal welfare concerns could do so with clarity.

(The Christian religious objection however is something I don't really begin to understand being an atheist but knowing that the Jewish, Christian and Muslim god is actually the same one and Christianity does not require specific prayers, so I don't understand why a prayer to their god, even in arabic, is so objectional)

As pp said, that man has been stoking racist tensions for a while now.

I don’t agree with vandalism but it’s ridiculous to say it’s due to him not serving halal, there are many Indian and non-Indian eateries that don’t serve halal.

www.instagram.com/reel/DS-AQW2CFfr/?igsh=cWFyYmZkeno5MjB1

Quite.

But there's some quite lazy and reductive thinking evident on this thread, with people stating as if fact that anyone with concerns about animal welfare MUST be just racists using this as cover for Islamophobia.

There have been assumptions made that anybody with concerns ONLY EVER raises them in relation to halal, and never gets involved in any campaigning to raise welfare standards more generally.

Based on no evidence whatsoever than their own personal feelings, it seems.

Like I said, lazy and reductive thinking. Unfortunately, there's a lot of it about.

Yes, I include halal and kosher. All communities are welcome to practice their traditions, but if it conflicts with UK law, there's a problem. Are Pagans allowed to ritually kill an ox on an altar? Are people who practice Voodoo allowed to ritually kill chickens? No, yet they can still follow Paganism or Voodoo.

When the law on stunning came in, no exceptions should have been made because it just leads to complications.

Yep, that’s the entire point. They took stuff out to make it vegetarian and halal but because they said halal, people are boycotting them
can’t add the pics due to signal but “fucking disgusting” and “halal has no place” were two of the nicer comments
they’re based in a heavily Muslim area

Do you think atheists should have to eat meat that’s been killed in a way to keep certain religions happy?

Mark 7:19: Jesus declared all foods "clean"

The ban on pork and shellfish is not carried over into the new testament, so a true christian would have no problem with eating pork

A lot of animals are missed when stunning is supposed to happen anyway. There is no guarantee that the meat you are buying is stunned even if it’s not halal.

I think if there are labels, it should include ‘this animal may not have been stunned’, as people are saying that is there issue. Or would they be ok to buy it if it was supposed to have been stunned but wasn’t actually due to procedures not being followed, chaos in the slaughterhouse, staff not caring etc.

Does that not just mean vegetarian? They don’t seem to sell meat products.

You must eat it isn’t going to work. By all means go with the labelling but the choice rests with the buyer and you won’t know much more than stats on demand dropping, if it does.