To be horrified at the abuse towards Green Party candidate who said he wanted to ban halal (non stunned) slaughter?

[FreshFreesias]

To be horrified at the backlash against Green Party candidate who said he wanted to ban halal (non stunned) slaughter?

Jonathan Bartley of the Green Party, was asked in an interview what he thought about halal slaughtering methods (where animals are often not stunned so are fully conscious when slaughtered). Quite reasonably, considering the party is meant to be pro animal welfare and that he is Vegan, he said personally he’d like to ban it.
There was a big outcry and calls for him to resign for Islamophobia. However he was asked about halal not kosher (which also requires animals not to be stunned prior to slaughter) and no doubt he would have decried any slaughter that requires animals to be slaughtered without stunning, whether it was kosher or halal.

This is a bit like campaigning against bull-fighting and being accused of racism against Spanish people.

Worst of all, when he was criticised, he back-tracked and explained that the Green Party supported kosher and halal slaughtering methods, so a bit of a 360 degree turnaround. Other Green Party apparatchiks then came aboard to grovel and apologise on his behalf.

I remember when the Green Party supported animal welfare and to find them going against recommendations from Compassion in World Farming and the RSPCA, who insist that stunning animals before slaughter takes away some of the pain from this unconscionable process, is very depressing.

Slaughterhouses are already so poorly regulated that to deny animals some relief by rendering them unconscious before they are killed is surely a terrible abomination. I do wish to respect all religions but I am disappointed that animal welfare is being so disrespected.

Argh, by not my!

58% is a majority @FreshFreesias

Can you provide a source for your information regarding “moderate stunning” please?

@WheresMyChocolate I prefer to listen to the RSPCA and Compassion in World Farming, rather than some obscure religious paper, who both wish to stop this abhorrent inhumane practice.

If animals are rendered unconscious before slaughter, this offers some pain relief.

I would point out that this is a welfare issue and I have no time for religious zealotry or those who seek to make political capital from the suffering of animals.

@Bearfamily1010
Here you go:

Chickens slaughtered for Halal meat are not being stunned effectively.

Instead of being rendered instantly unconscious when stunned, they will be receiving a painful electric shock that immobilises them before being slaughtered whilst fully conscious.

Chickens are immobilised, meaning they are unable to move, but still aware of what is happening to them and are able to feel pain, when their throat is cut.

Information is freely available online if you are really interested.
www.ciwf.org.uk/contact-us/faqs-halal-chicken-slaughter/

I looked into this a fair few years ago, perhaps the discrepancy between the 85-58% of animals being stunned comes from the fact that afaik, chickens are Td stunned and it's just larger livestock like sheep which get stunned but only head stunned rather than whole body stunned. I think there isn't really a need to eat red meat but for those living in majority world countries, including turkey like someone mentioned, they do need the protein from meat as it's hard to come by in other forms.

@WheresMyChocolate I prefer to listen to the RSPCA and Compassion in World Farming, rather than some obscure religious paper, who both wish to stop this abhorrent inhumane practice.

Eh? An obscure religious paper? Are you on glue? Temple Grandin is a person. She's a professor of animal science and is a world leader in the field of humane slaughter of life stock. But you crack on with your ignorant frothing.

The CIWF article you’ve linked says only 12% of UK halal is unstunned. So that puts the figure at 88% stunned.

What is the source for your 58%?

@wheresMyChocolate

I'm sorry you degrade legitimate concern about slaughterhouse methods as `ignorant frothing'.

Those of us who love animals would prefer it that they are slaughtered in the most humane way possible.

The RSPCA state: `We're opposed to the slaughter of any animal without first ensuring it is rendered insensible to pain and distress.
We therefore believe that all animals should be stunned prior to slaughter. Evidence clearly indicates that slaughter without pre-stunning can cause unnecessary suffering'.

And no, I am not `on glue'. I take it that this is some kind of insult?

If you are pro-animal slaughter you are definitely not an animal lover.

It does bemuse me that people are willing to turn a blind eye to abbatoir cruelty but when the word halal is mentioned there is an uproar. And those same people are in their local curry house scoffing halal meat every other week. Hypocrites.

Don't bother @WheresMyChocolate. As with anything about circumcision on here, it just becomes an opportunity to bash Jews and Muslims.

The reality is whatever way you kill an animal is barbaric - it's killing an animal. The point of halal and kosher slaughtering methods was in fact to make it as quick and painless and respectful a process as possible (in Judaism the person doing the killing must be a very learned/religious man). I can't speak for Islam (because I don't know) but in Judaism animal rights are a big deal - there are commandments you must feed your animals before you feed yourself. Stunning, meanwhile, doesn't always work and can make it an even more horrifying experience for the animal.

The Green candidate could have just said he doesn't think any animals should be killed for food and been done with it because ultimately, when it comes to murdering animals, there's not much in it.

FYI I do eat meat but I can spot a minorities-bashing thread from a while off.

Temple Grandin = obscure religious paper

She is incredibly famous for her work on animal welfare and as an autistic woman.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Grandin

Grandin has authored more than 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers on animal behavior and is a prominent proponent for the humane treatment of livestock for slaughter.

Those of us who love animals would prefer it that they are slaughtered in the most humane way possible.

Anyone who loves animals is against all abbatoirs, they don't just pick on halal to vent their racism in a socially acceptable way.

In short, your agenda is very obvious and clear, OP.

Well, firstly I think the whole accusing of islmaphobia etc is disgusting and find it quite offensive that kosher is never mentioned in this debate considering that muslims have agreed in many cases to pre stun whereas the Jews absolutely have not, if it's stunned it can still be 'halal' but no way can stunned ever be considered Kosher.
And yet only the muslims are getting critised, I don't think that is fair.

Secondly, I have read some research on this that suggested that properly done halal/kosher is more humane and safer from a cross contamination perspective.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

This from the FSA.

`In Britain, the percentage of Halal meat that is produced rapidly outsizes the Muslim population. It is believed by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) that from a total of 16m animals that are killed per week; 51% of the lamb, 31% of chicken, and 7% of beef is now religiously killed.29 Nov 2017'.

Sources may vary and so I suggest doing your own research. No doubt kosher slaughter will add further to these figures.

I am not putting myself up as some kind of slaughter expert. The point of my OP was to express concern that a politician who wanted to ban inhumane slaughter methods was being bullied.

Fresh Freesias

You lost all credibility (if you ever had any) when you dismissed one of the top scientific researchers without even checking who they were.

The amount of meat killed in halal slaughter isn’t the issue, it’s the amount of unstunned meat. The article you linked to gives a different much higher figure for the level of stunned slaughter than you are using.

I don’t even eat meat!

@SimonJT I don't support slaughter and am a vegetarian.
I also oppose bull fighting but am not anti Spanish. It is not about race or religion but supporting animal welfare.

As understand it Pre stunning is allowed for halal as long as it does not kill the animal. The animal must die from the knife cut but does not have to be conscious.

If you don’t support slaughter then why do you only have a problem with halal slaughter? Someone who genuinely had a problem with all forms of slaughter would make their stance on all forms clear, rather than pick one.

Personally I think it’s awful that any religion outweighs welfare in this country.

This.

Like fuck is it racist. I don’t eat meat, so animals being needlessly killed is just shit all round in my opinion.

BUT, if someone said to me tomorrow.. we’re gonna kill you, slit your throat. But we’ll give you the option of being stunned & unconscious first. What do you want? Of course I’d be fucking stunned!! Oh no thanks I’d love to stick around for the pain & terror

Would that make me a racist?! Course it wouldn’t! So why do you get to make that choice over something else’s life??

Fucking hell.

@havaina I am a vegetarian and would like to see the end to all slaughterhouses, but that is hardly likely to happen.

Surely it is incumbent on us all to ensure that animals are slaughtered in the most humane way?

I'm sorry that those people who are bringing this to the public's attention, like this Green Party candidate are so vilified.

Shining a light on slaughterhouses is much needed, as videos of slaughter houses are not widely spread as they ae so distressing.

I have no idea why halal and kosher slaughter methods are not mentioned together but they should.

Clearly @SimonJT OP has a problem with all slaughter, because she’s veggie. But she has more of a problem with a more cruel form of slaughter where the animals experiences more fear & pain. Is that really hard to understand?? What sort of dumb question was that...