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 their arguments sound? For whose benefit?