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

[nc0007]

Well it’s not really a debate, is it? You either don’t care, or you’re absolutely seething because your meat may or may not be halal. But irrespectively of what you think about this, AIBU to think that people ‘outing’ businesses on social media about what meat they use and encouraging hundreds of people to smear them not just in posts but reviews to tank their ratings is just crazy?

Hundreds of people commenting ‘I’ve just left them a bad review on google’ because a (British owned baked potato) business extended their trading hours to their Muslim customers? People who have never bought anything from them in their life, probably geographically will never go there. Actively trying to sabotage a business because you think you’re what - some sort of activist?

And don’t get me started on the posts where people reach out to these poor customer service reps in supermarkets to ask them if the meat they sell is halal because of this mad narrative that ‘80% of supermarket meat is halal’ - where has this nonsense come from?!?! 😂 People screenshotting and commenting about how ‘Clare from Lidl’ is avoiding the question when she probably doesn’t have a scooby and the answer probably isn’t a straight yes or no either!

Madness. Utter madness. People treating this like it’s a full time job.

Nice try but she said 'What if I go to Pakistan and DEMAND that Pakistan change their laws to suit ME an pd MY beliefs?'

Pakistanis didn't demand shit. The lie that they did is just Islamophobia trussed up with moral posturing. I guarantee you that poster will be eating a chicken burger from her nearest halal chicken shop this week.

Any practice where animals are slaughtered without being stunned first should be banned imo

Yes, but things like Sunday observance don't impact on animal welfare.

The RSPCA has said that not stunning causes unnecessary distress and suffering. The decision to allow exemptions to stunning based on religious grounds was cowardly and short-sighted.

What a crap counter argument. Laws were liberalised to prevent religious control, not enforce it.

Again, tell me how far this BS should go. Child marriage for some religious communities perhaps?
Tell me OP, is it fair to give exceptions to a law based on religion? Should Westerners expect the same in non-western countries and if not, why not?

Do you think we should move toward better standards of animal welfare, or not?

well, that’s just fine and dandy for you. but YOUR experience doesn’t invalidate mine; and i’d appreciate it if you don’t minimise or dismiss it simply because it doesnt match yours. you do realise that the world doesn’t revolve around you, and that others can have different experiences? yes, they can, and they do.

Here is video footage of so called 'humane' gas stunning of pigs that was reported in the press at a farm in Ashton-under-Lyne. WARNING: Distressing footage, do not click if it will upset you.

Why don't you care about these animal's welfare? Because Muslims and Jews don't eat pigs so you don't care about those animals.

ACTUALLY, if you bothered at all to read the OPs post, you would have seen that the OP referred specifically to halal. No mention of kosher.

Pakistan was used as an example- so what’s up? Why did the example it upset you so much? Do tell!

But what perhaps YOU don’t wish to acknowledge is that the discrepancy in the law has become more apparent because whilst there is greater visibility of outlets selling halal in the mainstream, there is little ‘kosher’.

Who asked for this? SUDDENLY people are aware there is an exemption from the law based in religion and what they see is businesses endorsing it. And don’t be surprised if people don’t like it.

I DO NOT CARE WHO CAMPAIGNED FOR IT! I want equality under the law AND I want higher welfare standards as THE NORM with ZERO exceptions!

End of.

Good try, good try, but not good enough. Not good enough by a long, long way.

Answer my question please, about a two tier legal system. Answer the points I raise in my post HONESTLY or don’t bother.

🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

No one can be this obtuse.

Picking on Pakistanis is stupid because they did NOT EXIST in 1933!

How could Pakistanis have campaigned for halal in 1933 when they didn’t exist?!

ACTUALLY, if you bothered at all to read the OPs post, you would have seen that the OP referred specifically to halal. No mention of kosher.

So what? It doesn’t change the fact that the Board of Deputies of British Jews campaigned hard for the slaughter exclusion, not Pakistanis. Because once again for those in the back - Pakistanis didn’t exist in 1933!

But what perhaps YOU don’t wish to acknowledge is that the discrepancy in the law has become more apparent because whilst there is greater visibility of outlets selling halal in the mainstream, there is little ‘kosher’.

So Muslims should be penalised because there are more of them? Twisted logic.

Why are you acting like a second rate lawyer in a made for TV John Grisham movie?

The point is that anything practiced that is illegal is punishable.

Outcry occurs PRECISELY when outrageous practices that people find abhorrent come to light. And when people learn more, they change their behaviour, an example being in the rise of purchase of free range eggs, vegetarianism and veganism.

What many people find SHOCKING is that slaughter without stunning, which is otherwise illegal in the UK, is allowed to happen just because some people have a certain religious belief the majority don’t follow, and some find offensive.

Your response is BS. If that’s the best you can come up with, give up.

I don’t understand why this is a debate, of course meat should be labelled Kosher or Halal and it would end all this argument as anyone choosing not to eat it (racist or otherwise) could choose, where they shop without the ridiculous boycotting and if you want halal/don’t care either way you can buy it cos it’s labelled 🤷‍♀️

I have many Sikhs friends and this come sup now and again and they do their best to avoid it infact some have gone vegetarian because they feel like food should be labelled halal or not to give them a choice. For them ...

Sikhs are generally forbidden from eating Halal meat (and Kosher meat) as it violates the Sikh Rehat Maryada (code of conduct), which strictly prohibits consuming ritualistically slaughtered meat. For a Sikh, eating Halal is considered a major transgression due to the belief that it involves unnecessary suffering and, fundamentally, because it is meat sacrificed in the name of God.

Why cant people be given a choice. If we a diverse country and about inclusion ...

If producers loose out, that’s on them

That’s is the point, the farm was NOT punished.

If you actually gave a shit about animal rights, you would know that.

It just proves that people like don’t care about animal rights, you’re just looking for a pound of flesh against Muslims and Jews.

🤣🤣🤣

Are you for real?

Sikh slaughter (called Jhatka) requires the animal to be BEHEADED without stunning.

That is why there are no Sikh abattoirs, there is no legal basis to behead animals for slaughter
in the UK.

If a wrong is being done
which clearly it is

then those who are being wronged and feel strongly about it have every right to
speak up

Writing to local MPs
the education secretary
signing petitions
telling schools why your kids won’t be having the school dinners
etc
is hardly going to out anyone and certainly not going to get them thrown in jail.

Every small thing that each individual does can make a difference, We shouldn’t push aside people on some basis that their morals aren’t thorough enough for others

If we do.
There’s no one left to fight

It isn't about their morals not being thorough enough, though.

It's about people picking and choosing and using concern for animal welfare as a proxy for racism and Islamophobia. A genuine concern about animal welfare would present very differently.

For those who want to eat meat but ensure welfare standards are higher

’ Certification Matters:
Simply labelling meat "high welfare" is not enough.

Labels with independent auditing (e.g.,
RSPCA Assured,
Organic,
Pasture-for-Life) are more likely to guarantee better slaughter standards than vague marketing terms.

Not All "Welfare" Covers Slaughter:
Some certifications (e.g., certain "free-range" labels) focus primarily on the life of the animal and may not guarantee specific, elevated slaughter standards. ‘

• Compassion in World Farming +4

@nomas the practice of jhatka came about in DIRECT opposition to the inhumane, barbaric practice of halal (where an animal is slowly bled to death so that it suffers maximally). stunning an animal, where it is killed instantaneously, and doesn’t suffer, is the modern day equivalent of jhatka, and perfectly acceptable.

And then there is circumcision.

Calling people racist or Islamophobic because they don’t agree with no stun slaughter or praying over animals
also pushes them away from speaking up

We are seeing this shaming a lot recently to shut people up and it’s utter nonsense

You don’t know what people’s reasons are
and no one has a right to judge without proof

Wait, isn't right wing or the far right or whatever you want to call them, not historically anti semitic?

As a vegetarian for 40 years I can unequivocally say I am very much against cruel slaughter of any animal. It's completely unnecessary, a point you seem very wedded to ignoring. At least factory farming has a purpose - to produce more food more cheaply.