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.

I don’t think parents should have to keep checking either. Schools should have guidelines to clearly label and provide food including for dc who are not religious.

It is though. They have to make sure the stun doesn’t kill the animal so they use a lower voltage which means the animal is likely to be aware through some of the slaughter. They are only unconscious for 15 - 20 seconds. They can not be dead before cutting their throats only 80% of halal meat is pre stunned. We stun our cattle pre bleeding them out but that’s done to make sure they’re dead. They are likely dead before that as we use a high voltage

I don't know what the evidence is for that, but fair enough.

Regardless, there is significant animal cruelty involved in all mass produced meat, so why is it only "Muslim cruelty" that some people seem to care about?

In primary I remember it was halal, non halal and veg. No beef and pork ever served.

The website. The city of London says it takes 4 minutes for death. Then google how long they’re stunned for on low usage it says 15 seconds. Which is literally what every website is saying whilst saying normal practices tend to kill on the stun and the throat cutting is making sure. Imagine not knowing what’s happened because you’ve been electrocuted to wake up bleeding out. One is definitely more cruel than the other

I don't know which website you're referring to, but I think you're kidding yourself if you believe that mass produced non-halal meat isn't cruel.

It should be standard in the UK

If people are genuinely concerned about animal welfare, perhaps it should be standard for schools to only serve vegan food?

The lesser of two evils perhaps

Everyone’s not going to be vegan but they can say no to religious rituals.

I wasn't talking about animal welfare as such but the option not to eat meat that has been ritually slaughtered by a Muslim practicing sharia law, or should people be left in the dark over that if somewhere decides to change from the norm?

Exactly. The city of London website says it’s uses a lower dosage to make sure the animal is definitely alive. I know just because both are cruel doesn’t mean they’re equally so.

Of course people can say no to religious rituals, but we need to understand that saying no to religious rituals is distinct from concerns about animal cruelty.

Another thing people might feel unhappy with the s the idea of eating meat that’s been imported (or may have been imported) to meet demands for Halal meat.

Maybe they don’t want to eat meat blessed by another religion?

How hard is it to just label food appropriately so people can make an informed choice? Weird that some seem to be anti-choice and think what you don’t know can’t hurt you. Well, no, that’s not how it works otherwise we’d just feed religious people food they don’t want, or feed vegetarians meat and tell them it’s Quorn.

OK, thanks for acknowledging that this isn't a debate about animal welfare. That's essentially what I have been saying all along.

Personally reading that description below it’s both. I think people will feel either or both and that’s valid.

So what level of animal cruelty do you find acceptable?

It is only valid if you also choose to avoid all other mass produced meat for similar reasons.

About 50% of animals slaughtered for kosher meat ends up on our shelves in the main market. Unlabelled
Thats half of the meat rejected
and half of the animals suffering needlessly

This from farmers weekly 2022

labelling needed as kosher mereaches non-kosher markets
Jonathan Riley17 August 2022
© Tim Scrivener

More than half of all non-stunned, kosher-slaughtered cattle are rejected by Jewish authorities and sold to the wider public instead, Defra figures show.

Kosher slaughter, under traditional Jewish Shechita laws, dictates that animals must not be stunned before they are killed.

This is allowed under an exemption to welfare legislation which otherwise requires all animals to be stunned before slaughter to minimise suffering.

The exemption for both Muslim halal meat and Jewish Shechita is caveated by additional guidance on religious slaughter, which states meat from animals slaughtered without stunning should be intended for consumption by Jews or Muslims.

See also: Pressure mounts to end non-stun sheep slaughter

But Defra’s latest report, based on a Food Standards Agency survey of abattoirs, showed that 51% of cattle and 43% of sheep slaughtered for kosher markets, were rejected in 2021-22.

The rejected meat was then sold as halal or to the wider public.

The figures collated in March 2022 also reveal a marked increase in rejection levels compared with the previous survey in 2018, when just 15% of cattle and 23% of sheep which had been slaughtered while conscious, were sold on to wider public markets.

Post-slaughter checks
A senior official in the meat processing sector suggested post-slaughter checks in the UK were stringent and failure was highly likely.

A single bruise in the meat, lightly damaged tendons or bones, and signs of abnormality in the organs, will result in the carcass being rejected as kosher.

The official, who asked not to be identified, also pointed out that Shechita law forbids the consumption of any hindquarter cuts.

“That means half the meat from animals which do meet Shechita rules is discarded by the kosher sector,” he explained.

“But it is still deemed to be fit for wider consumption and sold to buyers, largely in the food-service sector,” the official claimed.

He estimated that as little as a quarter of the meat from Shechita slaughtered cattle was sold for the intended kosher market.

Welfare concern
The RSPCA,
Compassion in World Farming and the British Veterinary Association all support an end to non-stun slaughter, to improve animal welfare at the time of death.

The Defra figures have also sparked concern from the National Secular Society which campaigns for the separation of church and state.
The society’s head of campaigns, Megan Manson, said: “It is both alarming and disturbing to think that more than half of all cattle, and more than 40% of sheep that undergo Shechita slaughter may not even end up in the kosher market.
“It means these animals endured a cruel death for absolutely no reason.”
Ms Manson added: “To make matters worse, that meat is likely to have been sold to the unwitting general public.

“The law is clear, that meat from animals killed under the religious exemption is supposed to be intended for religious communities in the UK.

“A business model that relies upon such meat being sold onto the general market, unlabelled, is both ethically and legally dubious.”

Labelling
The National Secular Society is therefore calling for mandatory labelling of meat from non-stunned slaughter.
In 2021, a public opinion poll found 70% of UK consumers thought food produced from religious non-stun slaughter methods should be clearly labelled, Ms Manson

The FSA Slaughter Sector Survey, England and Wales
Carried out by Official Veterinarians between 7-13 March 2022 the survey (PDF) took a snapshot of abattoir activities and throughput for the Food Standards Agency, Defra and the Welsh Government.
Across 161 red meat slaughterhouses, it discovered that

3,375cattle were not stunned
and

50,371 sheep were not stunned

primarily for the halal market.

All halal non-stunned animals were accepted, but Shechita rejections accounted for 51% of cattle (142 out of 276), and 43% of sheep 43% (223 out of 520).

No that is a stand alone description and I’ll avoid it based on that.

@NoisyViewerhas said more about what happens and how quickly in other processes and if that is described in another way I’ll assess on that separately.

I do pay more generally if I think it helps whether it’s eggs or other.

You can avoid it based on whatever you like. But if you are choosing to focus on one particular type of animal cruelty while turning a blind eye towards all other types of animal cruelty, then it's inevitable that people might question your motivations.

It is actually both. I would prefer my meat to be killed as quickly and painlessly as possible.
Also I would prefer is sharia law is not being practiced or imposed in Britain, especially on non Muslims.

I think it’s you who is focusing incorrectly on that.

I agree with @Poetnojoand others who have pointed out it is both.

But you don't give a shit about how it's treated during its life?

If you are eating mass produced meat, it is self evident that animal welfare is not a significant priority for you. And that's fine, I'm not judging what anyone eats.

I am merely judging the blatant double standards.

So you keep saying. You haven't actually managed to articulate why you think other forms of animal cruelty are acceptable though.