The dutch general election. The biggest one so far for the right wing?

[David Vincent]

Your misunderstandings of his post notwithstanding, I'm sure you'll read a terrible report like this and agree that cruelty is not unique to halal slaughter.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...oirs-two-years


Edit: in case you can't be arsed to read it:

"Failures in the slaughter process were also highlighted, with thousands of instances of animals not being stunned properly and in some cases not stunned at all."

I don't read The Guardian unless I'm looking for fake news.

One method seems to be cruel in error and the other cruel in principle. At least with stunning - even if it doesn't work every time - an attempt is made to lessen suffering.

Muslims when they do stun do not use the more effective captive bolt method of stunning. They are not "almost identical" methods of stunning as Jon59 suggests. Many animals need to be given the electric shock method of stunning more than once. It is stressful and unnecessary. Jon59's line of argument is a red herring. He is trying to divert the argument away from the increased use of a cruel method of killing animals in the Uk to whether I am an Islamaphobe.

Another thing that is overlooked is that Muslims are only allowed to use religious slaughter for consumption by Muslims. They are deliberately overproducing halal meat.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter

[jon1959]

I don't read The Guardian unless I'm looking for fake news.

One method seems to be cruel in error and the other cruel in principle. At least with stunning - even if it doesn't work every time - an attempt is made to lessen suffering.

Muslims when they do stun do not use the more effective captive bolt method of stunning. They are not "almost identical" methods of stunning as Jon59 suggests. Many animals need to be given the electric shock method of stunning more than once. It is stressful and unnecessary. Jon59's line of argument is a red herring. He is trying to divert the argument away from the increased use of a cruel method of killing animals in the Uk to whether I am an Islamaphobe.

Another thing that is overlooked is that Muslims are only allowed to use religious slaughter for consumption by Muslims. They are deliberately overproducing halal meat.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter

Thanks for partly answering my question. So you are saying that the method of stunning in halal abattoirs is less effective and therefore more distressing/cruel than in non-halal abattoirs? If that is true it is a fair point. It isn't something that I have seen in any of the news reports on the controversy from 2014, including this (presumably 'fake news') item:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ughter-involve

[David Vincent]

Thanks for partly answering my question. So you are saying that the method of stunning in halal abattoirs is less effective and therefore more distressing/cruel than in non-halal abattoirs? If that is true it is a fair point. It isn't something that I have seen in any of the news reports on the controversy from 2014, including this (presumably 'fake news') item:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ughter-involve

Here's a quote from an EU document :

"A concern is that after stunning, animals regain (some) consciousness.This is particularly so for electrical stunning."

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDat...75_REV2_EN.pdf

The same document says most halal slaughter in France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Spain is done without stunning.

Here are a couple of comments on ritual slaughter by our MPs in the 2015 Parliamentary debate :

"One of my Muslim constituents wants to buy halal meat because of not only the religious justification, but welfare. For him, halal slaughter is a method with a higher standard of welfare than other methods that were common, such as strangulation." Steve Baker (Con). In other words halal is good because it is better than strangulation. These are the idiots deciding our fate.

"My local Muslim community is concerned about this debate. Many do not feel that it is really about animal welfare; they worry that it is some sort of covert attack on them and their way of life." Diane Abbot

Another idiot made the same point.

"On the back of the Copenhagen and Paris attacks, many of my Jewish constituents worry that they are not wanted in this country." Matthew Offord (Con). So if we are opposed to religious slaughter we hate Jews.

"Sadly, it shows that perhaps ignorance, racism, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism lurk behind some of the respectable arguments." Mike Freer (Con).

Your argument against religious slaughter might seem respectable but it really means you are a racist.

Isn't Mike Freer saying the same as you Jon1959?

[jon1959]

I don't know if he is saying the same thing as me. I don't know if Diane Abbott is saying the same thing as me. Did either of them say that their main concern about methods of animal slaughter was 'animal welfare'?

Your misrepresentation and evasion were the reason I asked if you had any other reason to denounce halal abattoirs.

If, as you subsequently seemed to say, your concern is those abattoirs that don't stun before slaughter, and that where stunning is used it is (you claim) not as effective as alternative methods, then I will agree with you. But you also keep making comments in your posts that suggest you are opposed to the practices in halal abattoirs because they are based on some idea of religious compliance, separate from the way the animals there are treated. If that is correct (is it?) then it becomes a different discussion.