EnviroLink Forum

Greencarz: Try not to jump so quickly to supporting a petition or viewpoint until you checked the facts. Objections against halal slaughter are often based on emotion rather than facts. Why is halal slaughter worse than conventional slaughter (answer: those who want you to sign anti-halal petitions want to end *all* slaughter, this is just a way to get at that)? Fact is, we get emotionally upset because of the seemingly cruel way of halal slaughter, cutting a conscious animal's throat and bleeding it out. But the laws of halal slaughter require probably better treatment of the animal than Western methods: it must be done with a very sharp knife, and not in the presence of other animals, for instance (see http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halal.htm ). A very sharp cut in itself is not painful, as many humans will know from experience; and cutting the main vessels to the brain will cause unconsciousness very fast. There has been a German study of this : http://www.halalfocus.com/artman2/uploa ... t_1978.pdf is a translation. In addition, in some countries, mild stunning is used before halal slaughter. So before jumping to support what I consider questionable arguments and a petition, think: who is arguing for the petition? Are there arguments sound? For whose benefit?

I disagree with that kind of slaughtering. If you are a type of person who have concern a lot with animals then you won't disagree with that kind. Honestly, brutal way of killing animals specially if conscious is something that I vehemently disagree. I've seen a lot of videos pertaining to it and I always have this sad feeling.

My understanding (of Jewish Kosher slaughter, at least) is that it is not the cutting of a concious animal's throat with a sharp knife by a qualified, pious person that is objectionable. Rather it is the shackle and hoisting of the animal where the animal is suspended upside down in the air by one chained leg, before it is cut and the length of time the animal is made to wait and (I'm not sure if this is true) that more than one animal may be suspended and have to wait in line to be cut.

This is also my understanding. While the animal is hoisted and slaughtered it is fully conscious and hangs for at least several minutes. It was outlawed as inhumane by the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958 which required that the animal be rendered unconscious before being hoisted and slaughtered. 10% of animals are still killed this way in the US eventhough other methods of kosher slaughter have been developed. However, it is still the main method of kosher ( and Halal?) slaughter outside the US. A summary of Temple Grandin's findings: "Hanging a 1,000 to 1,200-pound animal upside down by one leg unquestionably causes tremendous suffering. It is common that this method causes bruising, torn flesh, and even broken bones. Furthermore, stress levels can be measured empirically through stress hormone (cortisol) levels. Stress levels for inverted slaughter with devices known as the Weinberg pen (which are less stressful than shackling and hoisting) have yielded the highest average stress ratings ever published (almost 300% higher than cattle killed in upright pens)."

http://www.grandin.com/ritual/conservat ... h.law.html

The shackle and hoist method as described above is not always used precisely because of the debate in animal welfare (not rights) among the rabbinate and others. Kosher slaughter permits that the animals be restrained upright (e.g. in a standing pen) until the moment of cutting or in a box-like holding pen that inverts the animal so that the cut may be made downward, and then suspending the animal upsidedown to bleed out.

And even the pens are considered inhumane because, "For that matter, some of the pens now being used also violate those laws. As Dr. Regenstein has pointed out in an e-mail to us, the technology of some pens requires that the animal be turned upside down. "The Facoima pen is at best marginal - and is used by at least one major OU facility in the US - although they have now gone from 180 degrees of rotation to 135, degrees .... The UK has moved to [require] upright kill. The Weinberg pen, which is not as well designed as the Facoima pen and also moves the animal upsidedown, is unacceptable." (from same source as above).

I think in Europe and the US, kosher slaughter is done mainly, if not exclusively, by the restraint method for animal welfare and worker safety. However, in South America, e.g., which is a large, if not the largest, supplier of kosher beef to the US and Israel, the shackle and hoist method is more predominant and is, moreover, endorsed by the Israeli Rabbinate and the US Orthodox Union.

Greencarz: Try not to jump so quickly to supporting a petition or viewpoint until you checked the facts. Objections against halal slaughter are often based on emotion rather than facts. Why is halal slaughter worse than conventional slaughter (answer: those who want you to sign anti-halal petitions want to end *all* slaughter, this is just a way to get at that)? Fact is, we get emotionally upset because of the seemingly cruel way of halal slaughter, cutting a conscious animal's throat and bleeding it out. But the laws of halal slaughter require probably better treatment of the animal than Western methods: it must be done with a very sharp knife, and not in the presence of other animals, for instance (see http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halal.htm ). A very sharp cut in itself is not painful, as many humans will know from experience; and cutting the main vessels to the brain will cause unconsciousness very fast. There has been a German study of this : http://www.halalfocus.com/artman2/uploa ... t_1978.pdf is a translation. In addition, in some countries, mild stunning is used before halal slaughter. So before jumping to support what I consider questionable arguments and a petition, think: who is arguing for the petition? Are there arguments sound? For whose benefit?

Objections against halal slaughter are often based on emotion rather than facts.

Objections against halal slaughter are often based on emotion rather than facts.

Indeed. But as you and I both know, Cobie, objections from ARs on everything from scientific research to wildlife management techniques to animal husbandry, usually are based on emotions not facts. The appeal to emotion fallacy is the ARs biggest weapon. And a lot of people drink the kool-aid without question.

Although all slaughter is unpleasant, religious slaughter where the animal is not pre stunned, but fully conscious whilst its throat is sliced open, then hoisted up on hooks through it's hind quarters and left for about 10 minutes until it bleeds to death is downright cruel, sadistic and barbaric. If you disagree with this form of slaughter or would like some more information, would you please click the link and sign the petition. Thanks
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/38160.html

I read the petition's line differently - once an animal's throat has been cut (which results in very fast loss of consciousness), the animal is *then* (the petition says, meaning, after) hoisted (so as to prevent blood covering the carcass making it -religiously- unclean) - so in my reading, this is just a petition that unless read carefully, may be presented against halal/kosher slaughter per se.