Dutch approve ban on religious animal slaughter, Muslims, Jews outraged

28 June 2011, Tuesday / AP, AMSTERDAM

People like to state it as a "ban against religiously slaughtered meat". That is totally not the point. The point is a ban against non-stunned slaughter. It´s not an anti-religion thing, but a anti-animal cruelty thing. By stating it as anti-religious the religious groups make it sound like a discriminating law, which it basically isn´t.

I think the rules surrounding religious slaughter were set up to prevent people from eating bad meat. No sick animals, etc. Times have changed since the creations of the major religions, and often times animal welfare has taken a step back (when it comes to animal used for food). However, the ability to slaughter animals after a quick stunning (not with electrical shock as people like to say, but with a bullet-like pin) is one of the few animal welfare improving inventions that we have seen. If we look at the essence of religion, is this really a bad thing?

OK, I hate the thought of animals suffering.  However, regardless of what this bill is disguised as (somehow I don´t think politicians care about animals...they barely care about people!!) it is clearly designed to marginalize certain religious practices.  It is fairly easy to see that the West and the East are engaged in cultural wars.  That is not to say that a country does not have the right to create laws that preserve its own culture, but I think we should call it like it is.   

I would like to know how many of those law makers were raised on an cattle farm?  I was and when it came time for slaughter it was a rule at my house, no playing with the animals, kill it quickly and painlessly and if this meant sticking a knife in the animal´s jugular veine then that is how it was done.

People who torture and mistreat animals prior and during the slaughter process are ignorant fools who have no respect for the food that they are processing, be it for themselves or for the general population.

Imagine what the non christians must think when they hear "this is this is my body...thi is my blood" during eucharist!! They must think we are a bunch of bloody canibals!

I´m not really surprised at Jews and Muslims being outraged by this bill, it sure does make things harder for them unless they decide to turn vegetarian. It´s going to have economic repercussions for halal/kosher butchers in the Cloggieland as well, I reckon some of them may go to the wall because of the ban. On the other hand, I do find slaughtering animals without stunning them first cruel, so my personal feeling would be that the ban has solid foundations.

I suppose halal/kosher meat is going to have to be imported now? German and French butchers must be delighted at the thought of taking over the Dutch market...

I am not Muslim or Jewish and I am outraged by this law.  If the meats are clearly labeled Halal/Kosher then let them have their meats and let the consumer chose.  Are we as humans so brain dead that we cannot chose what we want.  I would rather buy my meat from a halal shop then from big chain markets that gets their meats from slaughter houses who just "crank" out the meat.

Modern slaughter houses are not the humain, painless and stress free way of killing the animals we think they are.  It has been proven that those environment are the worst environment to slaughter animals.  They are dirty, infested with contaminents and many of the sick animals are just slaughtered anyways and the meat sent to the markets.

What next? 

Outlawing silk because the pour silkworm get boiled to death so we can have its much prized silk thread? What about wool, the sheering of the lamb "stresses" the pour animal!

did you know that Adolf Hitler banned Halal/Kosher meat slaughter, and during the reign of the reich, all the occupied countries had to adhear to those laws

"The current animal welfare laws in Germany are modified versions of the laws introduced by the Nazis"

 Ourtageous...these people are so damned arrogant! Stunning the brain of an animal is not a healthy thing to do at all. Is the animal inspected to see if it´s healthy? Stunning the front of the head can cause parts of dura matter to be spread throughout the carcass, making the possibility of getting  Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, the human form of Mad Cow disease.

I have never had any desire to go to Holland, keep your silly country. Ewww....I would not want to eat any Dutch meat...or any meat from stunned animals.

Eating meat means an animal died for you/us to eat it. The least we can do is take care to be respectful of the poor creature. If halal or kosher slaughter is done as intended, it is not cruel to the animal. I have seen many halal slaughters, and have not seen animals screaming and writhing in pain.

Alameda, soon you´ll run out of countries you took offence to - British customs officers made you not to want to visit the UK and now the Dutch idea of stopping animal cruelty puts you off the Netherlands. Why would you call a country that´s interested in animal rights silly but never used this word to describe a country where women´s rights are being violated by religious regime is beyond me...

I know if I were to die I´d rather be stunned than having my throat slit. But maybe that´s just me and cows appreciate watching their blood pour over their ears while hanging upside down - I´m not going to argue here as I base my idea on guessing rather than observation

If you were to hang a cow upsidown by their hind legs to slit their throats, firts of all the cow would flay around and you would run the risque of getting kicked.  The throat is always slit when the animal is standing on all 4 legs. Secondly, when the jugular is slit, by the second heartbeat of the cow there is no blood going to the brain, that is why the jugular is slit, to stop the blood flow to the brain so basicly the animal does not feel anything.  When the animal if finaly hung upsidown it is dead.

You should see how many times the animals are not "stunned" properly, yes the piston gun is not fool proof because the piston has to break the thick bone of the cow´s forehead, so in 90 percent of the times the cows suffer more with what is called the humaine way of butchering.

So you slit a cow´s throat, the animal falls on the floor with blood flowing out of the cut and when it is dead you hang it upside down so that the blood pours out? Ok, I stand corrected.

And, basically you´re saying that what I consider humanitarian way of slaughter is not so because it is sometimes done incorrectly? As opposed to 100% effective and never slipping hands of a butcher with a knife? Sorry, I find it hard to believe. I mean, sure, I can understand some animals happen not to be properly stunned, but the margin of mistake must be the same with animals killed the bloody way?

If you are right than Jews and Muslims and any kind of person is still allowed to kill in this way. The bill clearly states that killing an animal without being stunned is allowed when one can prove that the animal does not suffer more from this type of killing. A have heard a lot of Muslims complain that stunning or halal slaughter with a sharp knife give the animal the same level of harm. If that is so, they have nothing to fear.

And about the outraged people, calling this bill ignorant. What is ignorant about animal rights? I think a lot of people are so stuck in their religion, that they do not even want to slightly think outside of the box. So everybody is supposed to respect religion, but religious people should not look into methods of slaughter that will cause less distress for the animals? Who is ignorant then...

either way you kill an animal it is bloody, and when you slit the animal´s throat it is not running around willy nelly, it is in an inclosure that closes up on either side of it.  This type of enclosure the cow is used to because when it gets checked by the vet it is put in a similar inclosure.

I recommend you go work in a slaugther house for a few days and then come and tell me how you found the experiance...  I worked in a slaughter house...  and it is not because it is reglemented by the government that it is more humaine.  On the contrary like I said with the hight volume of animals needed to be butchered to feed the mass population, corners are cut big time.

Or maybe go vegetarian and leave the meat to people who´s heart does not bleed because an animal gave his life to feed them.

In any case, I don´t think this bill is at all an animal rights bill.  Like I said, I think it is a bill made purposely to marginalize a certain segment of the population and to send a clear message that these peoples traditions are viewed as barbaric and will not be tolerated.  Politians do not care about cows or sheep.  This is just a convenient ploy so that racism can be legalized.  That´s my take on it anyway.  You can debate about the cruelty of slaughtering animals and which way is more pleasant all day but this is racism pure and simple. 

I would start to worry more about the fate of man kind because frankly, animals have more rights than humans, it is not permitted to torture, tease, taunt or kill then in an inhumane fashion but humans torture, tease, taunt and kill each other in inhumaine ways and the laws are less strick towards human cruelty than towards animal cruelty.

Anyone who really cares about animal cruelty should look into the massive bio-industry in the same country. Millions of pigs, cows, chickens are living miserable lives. Sort that out first before fussing about the last minute of those lives. Debeaking chickens - killing off male chicks - confining animals into small places - cruel transportation - there is so much more that is inhumane than final death.

I  believe that this is specifically a target of islamic traditions. Because Netherland has a very right wing government, of which one of the supporting parties (Geert Wilders´ PVV) is openly anti-Islam.

This is also the same country who uses horsemeat to the extreme, included in their hotdogs. The very same country who has been supporting  imports from cruel horse slaughter houses around the world

Netherlands animal rights group Wakker Dier said  many hamburgers, frikandels and krokets in the country contain horsemeat.

The Wageningen University study of 286 food items found 32 percent contained meat from horses

I  think the problem lies with the mass agricultural farming process and the demand for meat.

easy solution stop eating it

( but... but .... what are we going to do with all those horse´s who don´t jump 3´6 on

command... and those piglets  who are not cute anymore  they dont´ need to be monitored in death  either.

PIG SLAUGHTERHOUSE - VARKENSSLACHTHUIS NEDERLAND

http://youtu.be/nzAfMtiYRnY

I´d just like to thank Stumpy for his posts and add that, as someone who has also been around ranches and slaughterhouses, I can confirm that all his points are correct.

Last week, I helped a friend with branding and cutting his bull calves last week and can say that this causes much more distress than slaughtering either by halal procedures or by using a knocker. Ranching practices are not always kind to the animal, even though they are necessary. All the ranchers I know do their best to minimize their animals´ suffering.

You know DaveT, it doesn´t have to be that way. I only buy eggs from a lady who lets me see her chickens. She has goats, rabbits, ducks, quail and chickens. I am happy to buy from her as I see happy healthy animals, and this is in the San Francisco Metropolitan area. She has a small lot, but it´s well organized. 

I am very against the industrialized methods of farming. They are inhumane and filthy. I pay more for the produce I get, but it´s worth it. You get what you pay for. 

alameda, there is no way to commercially raise meat animals without some suffering on the animals´ part. No bull calf, for instance, is going to enjoy being cut but it´s not practical to have a herd of bulls rather than steers, hence the bull calves get cut. There are similar practicalities for other procedures.

My friend, who I buy my beef from, is a small operator too, not quite a hobby farmer but certainly not a full time rancher. It´s nice to patronize people like this, but most people in the world will have to get their food from large corporations or do without. We should just encourage humane treatment by everyone.

You have a point there, but I do think we are overly reliant on the industrialization of our foods. There is a lot we can do ourselves. I have a small garden. It´s amazing what produce I get from it, and it´s tiny. 

We could grow & process a lot ourselves. 

What is wrong with using horsemeat? I don´t see how using horsemeat is an excuse for allowing non-sedated slaughter. What I also don´t get is that Holland is viewed as some sort of nazi country for this ruling. Other countries have had these rules for years. I´m disappointed by the intellectual elite of the religious Dutch, and their inability to look into their religious rules and how they treat all living things around them. Yes, my country is facing a danger of racism with Geert Wilders and his party, but this ruling is not the danger that we have to focus on. It is like saying that the feelings of Moslims are more important than the feelings of people who care deeply about animal rights.

My family are small scaled biological farmers. So yes, I have seen animals that have been slaughtered. I´m not the type of hypocrite that eats meat but doesn´t want to know where it comes from. I have seen the difference between a halal slaughter in Turkey and a sedated slaughter in Holland. With larger animals the difference is visible in my opinion. The branding of animals (burning their skin) that was mentioned before is illegal in Holland. I also think that the large scale bio industry is plagued by animal cruelty, but I don´t see this as an good argument for allowing halal slughter. The only good argument is that it is no worse than the alternative. If somebody can prove that, than halal slaughter is fine by me (and also fine by the Dutch government according to the proposed law).

In my country (Britain) we have relaxed the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter & Killing) Regulations to accommodate the Jewish and Muslim faiths. The RSPCA in their fact sheet http://www.rspca.org.uk/ImageLocator/LocateAsset?asset=document&assetId=1232719611043&mode=prd state that the time taken from cut to loss of brain responsiveness is 5-7 seconds in sheep to 22-40 seconds in cattle. This seems a long time to have to restrain an animal in the throes of death. It can be even longer apparently if as in some cases the arteries contract after severing. Surprisingly it goes on to say that 93% of halal meat in Britain comes from pre stuned slaughter. Some Jewish faith slaughter involves stunning after the cut is made.

The reason why I mentioned this is because the Netherlands have been buying  their horse meat from both South American and North American horse slaughter houses  and never concerned themselves on how these animals were treated prior and to death. It has been a cruel and long standing debate for years to the point where USA has banned horse meat slaughter houses for human consumption.

http://nohorsemeat.wordpress.com/horse-slaughter-in-aus/

http://www.alop.org/2011/04/south-american-slaughterhorses/

I am sure you would eat a cute puppy roast as long as the animal was stunned first before killing. In history because horse´s are a working and sport animal they is a mixed reaction to killing for consumption. And many countries consider this to be barbaric considering there are others animals to get your fill on.  I guess as long as it is not in your backyard it is ok to continue to support this and deny others the right of a religious need to have their meat handled in a specific manner. I am not against or for eating horsemeat it is just a point in trying to explain the dutch goverments mentality of thinking and that this is more for denying rights than supporting human animal slaughter which by the way on utube shows how many times failures also occur in regular slaughter houses  and even in the nederland with pig slaughter houses. Stunning is  not considered any better a solution . There is still trauma and pain ( just less noticeable involuntary body response to death. There  is a reason the meat is halal and stunning does not make it halal. Also mention that this stunning idea is designed for animal activists only to give them some sort of cushy pillow to dream on.... Go to a slaughter house and speak to the people who actually do the work. Many times stunning is not effect and actually causes the animal more pain and the people stunning don´t really care it is a production line and they are  blind to your feelings about animals suffering they are required to slaughter so many animals a day and will drag kick or do what ever is necessary to get them through the process.

Stunning actually harms the animal and if it were not slaughter and killed it could not return to normal life therefore haram.

Muslims and Jews have the right to practice their faith as they believe  and understand it, this right cannot and should not be taken away from them nor can or should anyone impose violation on Muslims by requiring prior stunning for religious slaughter. This principle is well illustrated in article n°9 of the European Convention of Humans Rights and of Fundamental Freedoms [5], quoted below:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right
includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in a
community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in
worship, teaching, practice and observance.

Instead if attention was paid to a better design and  better operations of the
slaughterhouse, with a staff trained and aware of the methods of handling animals;
religious slaughter is very compassionate to animals.

I can understand balconey and backyard sacrifices should not occur and instead give them access to a plant to help them on these particular days. Also they can pay for someone else to slaughter for them

1- Steps are needed to allow the animal to be kept calm and to reduce stress
and fear (applicable to religious slaughter and to slaughter with stunning):
• Optimization of the design of the slaughterhouse (proper lighting, nonslipping
flooring, solid walls, non-reflective surfaces, minimization of noise).
• The use of immobilization systems for the body (keeping the animal upright)
and to keep the head from moving during slaughter.
• The use of an automatic conveyor: While being handled quietly and calmly,
the cattle voluntarily enter the slaughter box: "the cattle place their head in a
holder that is specifically designed for the purpose and controlled by a
trained operator". It should be noted that Dr. Grandin has designed and built
boxes dedicated to religious slaughter  which are widely used
in the United States and elsewhere.
2-The perception of the pain during the incision:
• Use of a very sharp knife, with a length at least equal to double the width of
the neck (e.g., 12 to 14 inches for sheep and goats and up to 18 inches for
cattle).
• An adequately trained and experienced restraining box operator.
.• A fast, aggressive cut minimizing the number of continuous strokes.
• In that case, there is no reaction by the animal during the incision.”It seems
that the animal is not conscious that its throat is cut".
3- Time to loss of sensibility:
• The calm cattle collapse quickly (often after 10 to 20 seconds, average 17
seconds) and they have a faster onset of insensibility.
• The simultaneous cutting of the two carotid arteries and the two jugular veins
(as required by the religious rule) reduces, significantly, the time to loss
of sensibility. By carrying out a fast cut, 95% of the calves collapes almost
immediately [14].
• The best operators are able to cause bovines to collapse in 10 seconds [16].
• Conversely, with a slow cut the animal remains conscious for more than 30
seconds, in more than 30% of the cases.

There has been enough research  done to comparing both methods and  tests show actually through EEG that the stunned animal suffers more physical  changes and shows more stress.

I would rather eat stunnless halal meat.

The animal loses consciousness immediately. It is difficult to conceive a more
painless and rapid mode of death; for a few seconds after the cut is made, the
animal makes no movement, its body is then convulsed, the convulsive movements
continue for about a minute and then cease. The interpretation of this fact is clear:
the cut is made by a knife so sharp and so skillfully handled that a state of syncope
with its associated unconsciousness follows instantaneously upon the severing of
the blood pressure. The movement of the animal which begins at about 90 seconds
are epileptiform in nature and are due to the blood-less state of the brain (cerebral
ischemia with complete anoxaemia). Sensation has been abolished at the moment
of the initial syncope.

Wow....I´m surprised at that. Places here specify if they are (hand zabiha) slaughtered or not. Also, some have tried using a recording instead of actual "live" recitation. Now places specify what kind of zabiha they have. 

If you think about it, the Kashrut and Zabiha methods of slaughter are actually quite humane. Anyone who has cut themself shaving should realize when you cut yourself with a razor sharp blade, you don´t feel it....it´s only later you feel it...by then the animal is dead. 

I don´t think you can compare a small nick with a razor to the massive trauma experienced by these animals. Lets face it there is not a pleasant way of killing an animal. 

Before the advent of the "knocker" or piston gun to stun the animals, they were gored.  Who are we now to say that the halal way is wrong since it was the way we were doing it in the past?  It is yet another way for us to impose our ways by saying it is more humaine.  I beg to differ after having seen both ways of slaugthering animals. 

Threre are more pressing matters that needs to be tended to at the moment.  Famine in the world, war in the world, over use of natural resources, drugs being sold to children, children being sexually exploited and so on.  So I say to the law makers get your prioreties straight and stop passing laws that seems to put more importance on animals lives than on humans lives.  After they have done that then maybe they can start looking at ways to slaughter animals humainly while still respecting the halal way. 

Not to be too jaded, but, I wonder who profits from this ordinance? Who manufactures them? 

The ones who profit from this are orgenisations like PETA, MCL (Movement for Compassionate living), Vegan Outreach, Vegan and Vegetarian society, Compasion over killing and so on and so on. 

These movements are trying to impose their lifestyles on others and they do not care who they crush to  obtain their goals and if we stand up to them we are treated worst then the animals themselves. 

They cannot bare to watch an animal suffer but you don´t see them rallying behind the cause of a child being molested, where were they when a Philipino woman was decapitated and her body hung on the bottom of a helicopter and flown over the city in Saudi Arabia?  Where are they for the freedom flottila who is trying to make it to the Gaza strip again?  Another ship, the Tahir was attacked this time by the Greeks, the ship was damadged when the coast guard ship rammed the ship into the pear, men and women were beaten by the Greek coast guard.

So frankly I am disgusted by what the governments around the world deem as important.  They are farm animals raised to feed humans, if your way of killing the animal is by cutting it´s throat then let it be.  This is how it has been for eons, before it was sticks and flint tips used with clubs...

Frankly if it were humans that were being killed in such manners I don´t think it would be getting this much uproar...  Come to think of it, mankind is killing each other in such a fashion and no one seems to be bothered by it.

I´m certainly for compassionate treatment of animals, but I don´t think they know what they are talking about. They should take care of the inhumane industrial farming techniques first. Let´s start with what they eat. 

Yes, we have invented an amazing array of killng techniques....cluster bombs, white phosphorus, nepalm.....atom and nuclear bombs...yes some are trying to prohibit halal and kosher slaughter?????

Something is wrong with this picture. 

Can´t we kill them with sleeping pills? So at least they won´t suffer.

According to Islamic rules, we cannot eat blood. So the blood of the animal cannot stay in, the blood must be spilled out. That is why the animal must be slaughtered from throat. But you may offer to use a shot to paralyze maybe. However, the animal´s conscious also should be on.

Don´t think this would meet the halal rules somehow.   As I said earlier the RSPCA say over 90% of halal beef in the UK comes from prestunned slaughter. In Britain this is deemed the most humane method. 

I thought this would make almeda smile

 http://youtu.be/hVrIyEu6h_E

Quote:Acute

trying to embed a utube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrIyEu6h_E

is this the link you are trying to post?

Love it, thanks!

Well, let me make it very simple. If I had to die, and I had to choose between somebody shooting a bullet in my brain or somebody slitting my throat, my choice would be VERY easy. I choose the bullet through the brain. The stunning method that is used in Dutch non-halal slaughter houses has the same effect as a bullet through the brain, since a metal pin is shot in the head.

Alternatives that were mentioned here before, combining halal and stunning seem good to me. And the fact that other animals are mistreated too is still a lame excuse for halal slaughter, if halal slaughter isn´t animal friendly. The only good excuse for halal slaughter is, that it doesn´t hurt the animal more than stunned slaughter. And, like I said MANY times before, halal slaughter is still allowed if it is proven that it doesn´t cause more stress. So, if people are so convinced that it doesn´t cause more stress, than why be outraged?

PS.... why is this thread under Turkey? I don´t see the link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halal

his report quotes in particular the Ph.D work of Dr Pouillaude which concludes by: "religious slaughter would thus be a less stressing mode of slaughter. Conclusions of all the scientific experiments converge towards a firmly supported certainty: properly carried out, religious slaughter is the most humane way because it leads to less trauma to animals to be killed to be consumed for its meat".

http://www.shariahprogram.ca/eat-halal-foods/halal-slaughtering-controversy.shtml

THE SCIENTIFIC FACTS
A team at the University of Hanover in Germany examined these claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the Halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainders were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.

THE HALAL METHOD
With the Halal method of slaughter, there was no change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves sharp instrument, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds characterized by a condition of deep sleep like unconsciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does a no longer record any sensual messages.

THE WESTERN METHOD
Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the seizes to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen - a brain death, to put it in laymen´s terms - the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures. It is so much easier to dispatch an animal on to the conveyor belt, if it does not move.

APPEARANCES CAN DECEIVE
Not all is what it seems, then. Those who want to outlaw Islamic slaughter, arguing for a humane method of killing animals for food, are actually more concerned about the feelings of people than those of the animals on whose behalf they appear to speak, The stunning method makes mass butchery easier and looks more palatable for the consumer who can deceive himself that the animal did not feel any pain when he goes to buy his cleanly wrapped parcel of meat from the supermarket. Islamic slaughter, on the other hand, does not try to deny that meat consumption means that animals have to die, but is designed to ensure that their loss of life is achieved with a minimum amount of pain.

Excellent post Stumpy! You know, some really already have their minds made up. No amount of scientific material will convince them, so it seems. That shows real prejudice. 

I might point out the fact that bullets through the brain do not always mean death. Gabbriele Giffords comes to mind. 

I´ve cut myself with sharp blades numerous times, either while cooking, or doing some other task. The cut is hardly felt at the moment it´s happening, if the blade is sharp. 

I know alameda, they have their minds made up and I am willing to bet all that is important to me that those people have never butchered their own meat to eat it.

I had the main artery cut on my right wrist with a doctor´s scalpel, no anestisia no pain killers...  The only pain I felt was when the doctors put a garot on my wrist to stop the bleeding after the intervention.

The piston gun is only used to make the work of the slaugther house workers easier to handle the animal.  After being stunned the animal is then gored and hung to bleed, so it is more humaine for the workers and not the animals.

My reasonning is if you cannot butcher your meal yourself then do not tell others how to do the work and do not work in those types of environments.

People want to eat meat but then tie the hands of the ones who have to do the dirty work for them to enjoy their serloin steak.  We have been butchering animals in that fation since the advent of the blade.  I have shed a tear when I killed my first animal even now I still cannot butcher a rabbit and my brother who is 6 feet 2 and weighing 250lbs cannot butcher ducks but we have learned to respect the animals we are about to kill for our meals and not show them the blade that will slice it´s throat and WE ARE NOT MUSLIMS.  It is basic respect to the animal that will become our meal.

Hmmm...I can´t get rid of the quote of mine....the box just fills up wth other text. Drat!

Anyway, I have not actually slaughtered any animal myself, I´m afraid I´d cause the animal to suffer. I should learn as I´m thinking of getting chickens, ducks and quail. 

In the past I´ve hired someone to do it for me. The man that did it was very fast and the animal didn´t even cry. I grow veggies and before I pick, I say a prayer. I know it may sound silly to some, but I"m against any mindless harvesting. It´s rude to just rip off leaves and fruit. 

Hmmm....cutting the head off isn´t halal or kosher. The jugular vein must be cut. The man that did it for me used to get the body of the bird under his armpit, the neck between his two fingers. I´ve heard when chickens heads are lower than their body they sort of go into a hypnotic state. As soon as the vein was cut he put them in a sort of funnel thing to bleed them. All in all the whole thing was smooth and neat. 

I have a friend who has hens and I´ve been getting used to petting and holding them. Maybe. As one friend of mine says, "they have a really good life, then a few uncomfortable seconds". I´d like to make those last seconds as nice as possible. The man that did the slaughter for me didn´t seem to cause any discomfort to the animals. 

"Ḏabīḥah (ذَبِيْحَة is the prescribed method of slaughtering all animals excluding fish and most sea-life per Islamic law. This method of slaughtering animals consists of using a well sharpened knife to ma"ke a swift, deep incision that cuts the front of the throat, the carotid artery, wind pipe and jugular veins but leaves the spinal cord intact. The head of an animal that is slaughtered using halal methods is aligned with the Qiblah.

no it´s not alameda, the ones we used a knife on were the big animals like the goats, lambs beef and pork, chicken, goose and ducks we used the hand axe

I think if the head is cut off the jugular is severed as well. The trauma to the animal must depend on the sharpness of the knife and the skill of the user.

Bydand,

You are quite correct whey you point out the skill of the one doing the slaughter impacts creatly on the suffering of the animal, which is one reason I have not done this. On the other matter it seems I was not clear enough. Kosher and Halal do not allow the spinal cord be cut. 

" Ḏabīḥah (ذَبِيْحَة is the prescribed method of slaughtering all animals excluding fish and most sea-life per Islamic law. This method of slaughtering animals consists of using a well sharpened knife to make a swift, deep incision that cuts the front of the throat, the carotid artery, wind pipe and jugular veins but leaves the spinal cord intact.The head of an animal that is slaughtered using halal methods is aligned with the Qiblah."

Nobody has "made up their minds"...it seems sensitive people have made up their minds that this law will be anti-muslim or anti-jewish. But if the science backs it up, halal and kosher slaughter will still be allowed. Why cry wolf when there is no wolf around? The story tells us that it is dangerous to do that.

Oh but there are wolves around and they are dressed up as law makers that do not have a clue what goes on on ranches and farms and basicly have no clue what so ever what it takes to raise, tend and butcher meat.

Here´s a recent article in Science News about brain cell death. It seems that about a minute after the blood supply to brain cells is cut off, an electrical charge buildup is released, resulting in "an eerie shudder of activity". This doesn´t address the difference between halal slaughter and the Western practice of using a knocker but it´s an interesting, if morbid, article at least.

The link is:
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/332665/title/Wave_of_death_may_not_be_a_last_gasp

That may not work for everyone, as Science News requires subscription registration for some articles, so the full text is:


Almost a minute after a rat’s head is severed from its body, an eerie shudder of activity ripples through the animal’s brain. Some researchers think this post-decapitation wave marks the border between life and death. But the phenomenon can be explained by electrical changes that, in some cases, are reversible, researchers report online July 13 in PLoS ONE.

Whether a similar kind of brain wave happens in humans, and if so, whether it is inextricably tied to death could have important implications. An unambiguous marker could help doctors better decide when to diagnose brain death, knowledge that could give clarity to loved ones and boost earlier organ donation.

In a PLoS ONE paper published in January, neuroscientist Anton Coenen and colleagues at the Radboud University Nijmegen in the Netherlands described this wave of electrical activity in the rat brain occurring 50 seconds after decapitation. The Nijmegen team, which was exploring whether decapitation is a humane way to sacrifice lab animals, wrote that this brain activity seemed to be the ultimate border between life and death. They dubbed the phenomenon the “wave of death.”

But neurologist Michel van Putten of the University of Twente in Enschede, the Netherlands, wasn’t convinced. “We have no doubt the observation is real,” he says. “But the interpretation is completely speculative.”

In the new study, van Putten and colleagues devised a mathematical model of how a nerve cell would behave if its oxygen and energy supplies were suddenly cut off. The model consists of just a single cell with three kinds of channels that allow charged particles to flow in and out. The spaces outside and inside nerve cells have unequal electrical charges, a difference that allows neurons to fire the impulses they use to communicate.

After an abrupt halt of energy and oxygen supply, the channels stop functioning normally, causing a buildup of positive charge outside the cell. This buildup prompts a big discharge of electrical activity about a minute after starting the simulation — the wave of death.

Study coauthor and physicist Bas-Jan Zandt, also of the University of Twente, says that the simulation closely matches what is observed in the rat brain. Such cell behavior could be the start of a damaging process, he says, such as cell swelling, but there’s nothing about the actual wave that means the nerve cell is going to die.

“It doesn’t cause damage to the cell,” Zandt says. “In principle, it is a reversible process.”

The observed brain wave may represent an event on the way to death, but probably isn’t death itself, says clinical neurophysiologist Kevin Nelson of the University of Kentucky in Lexington. Coenen, coauthor of the earlier study, says he was happy to see the modeling experiment. “It nicely shows what we already expected,” he says of the study’s finding that the wave is due to a massive change in cell membrane charge. Yet he still thinks that this wave may be an irreversibly damaging process, and he and his team plan to test this.

Laws are not made in that way. Laws are written and set up by specialists. It´s never a single minister or something who writes a law. But I guess you didn´t really look into that system, and basically have no clue what so ever it takes to write a law. Come on... you can disagree with the law, but don´t pretend like law makers are idiots because they have a different idea than you do.

and laws are changed. It was legal to own slaves and do whatever one wanted with them, it was illegal in many places to drink, now it isn´t. Who is empowered to make the laws? I think Nazi Germany had some laws too.........as did Italy and a few other places. 

Come on yourself barba_mama, law makers think that the general population are idiots and need to have rules and laws written up so that WE defensles souls do not "hurt" ourselves and others and that we need to be sheppered onto the "right path", they make laws apon laws that make no sense and do not see the long term affects of some of those laws and the negative impact that some of those laws will have.  Why don´t they make a law that it is illegal to stare at the sun because it can damadge the eyes while they´re at it??

I just think that there are more important things to think of then how a friggin animal is butchered.

And if you think I have no clue what it takes to write a law why don´t you so kindly enlighten me please!

The dutch parliment has their heads screwed on backwards

This is a country that allows drinking at age 16

prostition and human trafficking ( The Netherlands is listed by the UNODC as a top destination for victims of human trafficking)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_Netherlands

assisted suicides are legal

abortions up to 24 weeks gestation ( is that not cruel and inhuman to a fetus to not be given the right to live) regardless of the woman´s dislike or inconvience for a pregnacy who maybe should of considered better birth control

In the Netherlands, abortion performed by a certified clinic or hospital is effectually allowed at any point between conception and viability, subject to a five-day waiting period. After the first trimester, the procedure becomes stricter as two doctors must consent to treatment. In practice, abortions are performed until approximately 24 weeks into pregnancy, although this limit is the topic of ongoing discussion among physicians in the Netherlands, since, due to recent medical advancements, a fetus may sometimes considered viable prior to 24 weeks. 

BM  do you dutch really think all those ponies and horse´s are raised humanly/healthy for your consumption, more often than not they are the bottom of the barrel, broken old backyard horse´s, neglected sick animals, you basically eat what the USA and Mexico considers garbage and not fit for human comsumption.

Karma is a bitch....

getting back to basics this is a racist move on nederlands part to eraducate and control muslims by adjusting their  islamic laws and  beliefs.

from my research I find most dutch  are arrogant and argumentative regardless of proof they are wrong. For such a small flat and undescriptive country they are a bunch of whiners and complainers, like having a nation of green peace boaters on land. They never are really concerned about the logic or outcome of their cries they are  just satified with the fact they can voice their opinion and complain.

Actually, much of the horse meat is from wild horses "harvested" and sold to slaughter houses. So so so sad to see a beautiful wild horse treated in this way. Marilyn Monroe and Clark Gable´s last movie, The Misfits,  was about that. The Bureau of Land Management was allowing this. 

"The U.S. government has halted its sale of wild horses while it investigates two separate incidents of mustangs being resold for human consumption."

............and it still goes on....

In fact, the taste for horse meat has led to people who own horses to need extra protection to keep their own horses from being kidnapped and sold for slaughter....and the worst of it is....the most desirable horses for slaughter are the best horses....how do I know? I have cousins who raise and board horses. Horse rustling is still common and still going on. 

Hey, I love Greenpeace...... 

actually you are wrong about wild horses, wild horses are shot not captured for horse meat

  check out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_meat

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/starving-horses-used-dutch-snacks

a video of the condition of horses used for slaughter for dutch snacks

WARNING THIS VIDEO WILL MAKE YOU CRY

http://vimeo.com/10630091

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/starving-horses-used-dutch-snacks

In 2005, the 5 biggest horse meat-consuming countries were China (421,000 tonnes), Mexico, Russia, Italy, and Kazakhstan (54,000 tonnes).^[26]

As horses are relatively poor converters of grass and grain to meat compared to cattle,^[5] they are not usually bred or raised specifically for their meat. Instead, horses are slaughtered when their monetary value as riding or work animals is low, but their owners can still make money selling them for horse meat, as for example in the routine export of the southern English ponies from the New Forest, Exmoor, and Dartmoor.^[27][28] British law requires the use of "equine passports" even for semi-wild horses to enable traceability (also known as "provenance"), so most slaughtering is done in the UK before the meat is exported,^[28] meaning that the animals travel "on the hook, not on the hoof" (as carcasses rather than live). Ex-racehorses, riding horses, and other horses sold at auction may also enter the food chain; sometimes these animals have been stolen or purchased under false pretenses.^[29] Even famous horses may end up in the slaughterhouse; the 1986 Kentucky Derby winner and 1987 Eclipse Award for Horse of the Year winner, Ferdinand, is believed to have been slaughtered in Japan, probably for pet food.^[30]

There is a misconception that horses are slaughtered for pet food, however. In many countries, like the United States, horse meat was outlawed in pet food in the 1970s. American horse meat is considered a delicacy in Europe and Japan, and its cost is in line with veal,^[31] so it would be prohibitively expensive in many countries for pet food.

The British newspaper The Daily Mail reports that every year, 100,000 live horses are transported into and around the European Union for human consumption, mainly to Italy but also to France and Belgium.^[32]

Meat from horses that veterinarians have put down with a lethal injection is not consumed, as the toxin remains in the meat; the carcasses of such animals are cremated (all other means of disposal are problematic, due to the toxin).

I am NOT wrong about it....I live in the American West....have family who raise horses in the American West....and family members who are in Forrestry Service....I know. Some are captured for human consumption, some are not. 

Riight, so horses are beautiful animals that do not deserve to be consumed by people, while cows are repulsive and thus it´s morally justified to slaughter them?

People eat meat. Deal with it. What kind of meat they eat is based on the culture they grew up in. Some eat pigs, some dogs, other snails, frogs or locust. It´s pointless to comment on personal preferences, just as it´s pointless to refer to one´s meat as garbage. I´m sure horses are not the only animals that suffer terrible conditions of breeding. Basically the only kinds of meat I eat is chicken and pork, not because of ideology but rather because of personal taste. I wish I were a more sensitive person and researched the conditions in which they live and die. I have thought about it but then decided to trust the providers, which 99% of the time are big shopping chains.

I also don´t get what laws defining personal freedom have to do with laws protecting animals. It is debatable which method of killing is more humane, however, until an animal survived both methods and lived to tell us about it, it´s pointless to speculate. Prostitution is a matter of choice, so is the decision to have a child (although I am against abortion after the 1st trimester). It´s quite difficult to expect the animals to express their preferrence concerning their choice of death. As for drugs, I don´t think they´re legal in the Nerherlands, isn´t it just for marijuana and even that with certain restrictions?

As for the need of law, I think it´s obvious. Stumpy must have met better people than I have, as without law most people I know would go mental hurting both themselves and their surrounding.

I have no idea if the law is anti-Muslim or anti-Jewish, I read it as the law to ensure animals are not treated with cruelty (whether or not this really is the case with stunning). Is banning polygamy in Europe anti-Muslim too?

The debate was not about what animals, but how the animals were slaughtered. Obviously some, imported and eaten in Europe were not slaughtered in a humane manner, thus all the crocidile tears about humane slaughter methods is a bunch of bull. Maybe you should actually do some research as to what the conditions the animals you eat are raised and slaughtered in. I did and have changed the way I do things. 

There is a movement here to raise chickens, turkeys, ducks,rabbits and goats in people´s backyards. I only buy my birds & eggs from people whose chickens I see actually running around scratchng the ground for bugs, riding the backs of goats and folicking in hammocks. I can´t help but feel these eggs are more healthy than the ones in cramped battery cages with their beaks cut.

Here see European Factory farm chickens

Below is where I get my eggs and chickens from now. I pay more, but it´s healthy and I eat less. 

Acute - I´m ok with 1st trimester abortion as it is about that time embryo becomes fetus. Apparently it is somewhere near 8th weeks so I´d be ok with limiting the procedure up to that week as well. Why do I not consider abortion of embrio a murder? Because it is not a human being yet biologically, it´s just a bunch of cells with prospect to become one. However, unlike those whose beliefs make them think otherwise, I´d rather not impose my views on others. If you consider it a child, you won´t terminate pregnancy whether or not it is inconvenient for you. I don´t actually think I´d be able to terminate a pregnancy however inconvenient it was for me, but I do not consider myslef to be in position to make this decision for other women. After all, women are not incubators and their rights to decide about their body should be respected. Just like nobody can force you to donate your kidney to somebody who needs it, only because you´re a match, nobody should be able to tell a woman what to do with her uterus. But it´s not really about animals, so let me finish here.

About the providers - like I said, I was simply too lazy to do that so I conveniently assumed big food chains have big inspections. I may be wrong, though. I have no idea how humane farms are as the only time I´ve seen an animal slaughtered was when i was about 6 and on my grandparents´ farm. They did not have any big animals, just a few chickens and a tobacco fields, but their neighbours had sheep. One day they killed a ram and it wasn´t a nice sight, the poor animal was terrified when one man held him by the head and the other one slashed his throat. i couldn´t watch it. Even decapitated chickens running around beheaded did not make me as disgusted.

I´d never say Cloggies have their heads "screwed around", quite contrary, they are lovely, hard working people with laws that do not limit personal freedom as much as possible. Also, as for a tiny country reclaimed from the sea, they do pretty well.

Human trafficking is illegal in the Netherlands as far as I know. Is it bad for it to be illegal?

The comment about law was to Stumpy, not you. She said a few posts pack that we don´t need laws are people are not dim. I tend to think otherwise

Agreed about sex with minors.

I did not say we did not need laws but some laws treats us as if we are stupid and need to be guided like sheeps.  Unfortunatly looks like too many people are adle minded and have blind faith in their law makers and government representatives... 

I do not need a law that tells me what color my house has to be, I find that a law that dictates what language I have to teach my children repressive and a law that tell me how to slaughter an animal when the people who passes that law probably never set foot on a farm and propably do not know a thing about farming is absurde.

Here is an article from Canada free press, makes you think and take a good look at everything around you.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2506

Just how much stupidity can one world tolerate?

“Life is hard. It’s harder if you’re stupid.”  - JOHN WAYNE

Is stupid the new smart? Is dumb the new wise? Is oblivious the new aware?

I am prompted to pose these simple questions in light of current events as witnessed through the probing lenses of television cameras and the scribblings of the popular print media, not to mention the prolific news sources found on the Internet and the overcrowded field occupied by far too many bloggers all jostling elbow-to-elbow for my rapidly diminishing attention span.

Have you noticed over the past decade or so how television, movies, magazines and newspapers glorify the antics of really stupid people? I think the movie Dumb and Dumber opened the floodgates to this trend.

Then again, it might have been launched with the creation of the 1950s sitcoms. At that time dad was portrayed as a fairly intelligent creature who could guide his household and steer his children in the right direction. Mom was really the power behind the throne but dad didn’t know it. If he did, he kept his mouth shut. And the kids? Well, they actually had something to learn from old dad. What a concept.

Now fast forward to the New Millennium and the wonderful world of commercials. It is in that world where you see how the producers of these mini-dramas really view the component parts of today’s family.

In their world, dad, if he is in the family picture at all, is a bumbler, a fool and a gluttonous boor who wolfs down pizzas while still in the box and who has absolutely no idea how to do anything from hammering a nail to tying his shoes. Of course he is uncertain as to whether his shoes are on the proper foot. Dad is usually portrayed as a pathetic clown, a shell of a man, who is virtually irrelevant to family life, except as a supplier of money for cars, cell phones and video games.

Enter mom. Vivacious, smart, impeccably groomed, harboring a razor-sharp encyclopedic mind choc full of wonderful solutions to any problem imaginable. Meanwhile her task to guide dad around prepping him to do menial tasks around the house if she can pry his big, fat ##### off the couch to do anything remotely physical requiring the motor skills of a slug.

But all is not lost in these dysfunctional families. There are always the children. Yes, the children. It is they who really run the household in the commercial world. They also run mom and dad. It is the kids who choose the home for the family and how to decorate it; they pick the family vehicles by color and style to match their peers at school or face a beating, stores in which to shop,holiday destinations, clothing, hair styles and the family pet which they expect dad to look after if he can find the instructions.

And these kids are oh so smart. At age six they can tell you how to fix your car, build an addition to your house (they don’t actually work or do chores though), tell you how to speak and when to go to bed. And that’s the good stuff. With their computer skills they can bring us to the brink of nuclear war, destroy the economy and on a good day, wipe out the memory banks of half the computers in North America. For that, they are treated like comic book heroes.

Meanwhile, commercials you will never see are those showing kids actually learning something from their parents, doing chores around the house, looking after the family pet, or cleaning up their pigpens that double as bedrooms. In the latter case mom just sprays some deodorant around and leaves the room smiling.

One problem with all of this is that far too many parents have accepted these fantasies as realities. What we get for it is a never-ending parade of screaming, out-of-control brats infesting restaurants, shopping malls, theatres, parks campgrounds all to the oblivious smiles of mom and dad much to our dismay. I assume they have rights allowing them to destroy the serenity of others.

Since many commercials reflect the leading edge of thinking, and I use the term loosely,  in the entertainment industry, it was only natural that related sitcoms would follow, not to mention the movies.

So, today you can pick and choose from a lengthy menu of movie and television fools, idiots, morons, failures and simpletons to entertain you, give you advice and tell you what’s cool and what’s not. I suspect intelligence isn’t cool with the crowd unless you’re Bill Gates.

But there is another side to all of this and it’s called reality. If you just take a quick peek around you will see how reality has been distorted. Common sense and insight have been shunted aside in favor of gullibility and credulity.

It’s chilling really. And that’s why I think the world today is so easily fooled by charlatans and posers who have no solutions to real problems. Is this why we are being spoon-fed copious amounts of pap about Britney Spears, Hannah Montana and Barak Obama? They keep our minds off real life.

For instance, the Global Warming fable that has become the flavor of the year for so many. In spite of evidence to the contrary that the world over the past five or so years has been cooling, so many scientists, preachers, politicians, journalists and academics have seized on the fantasy so religiously they cannot stop bowing down to the discredited green idol.

In our gullibility we are allowing our governments to tax our economies into ruin in the name of saving the Earth; create repressive laws and institutions designed to wring complicity from its citizens, all in an effort to appease and ultimately capitulate to the eco-anarchists who are striving to create chaos and fear and dictatorship.

And it’s not only Global Warming about which we have been duped. Consider the housing meltdown in the U.S. The bankers who engineered that catastrophe are supposed to be captains of the economic ship. How did it reach the point it has. Some ship. Some captains.

And what about the oil prices that are dragging us toward an economic abyss? We are constantly told it is the market. What market? Driving the oil prices is a system created by for commodity gamblers. Prices are not based on demand, cost of production or levels of supply. They’re based on Ouija Board economics.

The media likes to call these gamblers,  speculators. We should be calling them criminals. Better yet we should be calling them inmates along those who enable their greed.

I could go on but won’t. You can develop your own list of stupid ideas, practices and leaders to suit your own locale. The idea is to expose them. Challenge their stupidity. Pry them from their hiding places and wrench their mantles of greenness, piety and purity from them. They hate it when that happens.

If we continue to follow stupid people with stupid ideas and stupid policies we will indeed find life harder.

Where is John Wayne when we need him?

Bill McIntyre

Well, if it were Poland, I´d agree, but I somehow doubt that laws are passed by people who do not know anything about the subject. You must realise how many specialistic examinations and research it takes to give an expertise about a matter...I somehow doubt you conducted scientific experiments on your farm comparing stress levels at animals having their throats brutally slashed and ones that were unconscious while being slaughtered.

What do you mean about the language? Sounds interesting, could you elaborate? I assume you don´t mean the language taught at home but the choice of language in state schools?

I am French and English by birth I live in a province that forbids me to send my children to English schools because I went to French schools in other provinces.  My English was aquired in those French schools because they educated us in a maner that would give us an advantege over the one that only spoke English or French.  So now I can only give a second rate education to my children because the provincial government is so paranoid of lousing their French identety that they force us to send our children to French schools with a less than mediocer English program.  And you say it is inteligent people that make laws.

What if you moved to a different province? Or does the continuity of learning French goes for the whole Canada? I wasn´t aware you cannot choose your child´s first language in a country with 2 official languages. See, it´s again, putting the national heritage interest over personal benefit of citizens. I thought Canada was better than that.

don´t worry Canada is better than this

most provinces are english speaking except one province which wishes to have and keep it´s french heritage which is Quebec. They have a nationalistic approach to goverment and all. They are given more funding than most provinces and they the province have chosen  to keep french as the main language and english as secondary whereas all other provinces are the reverse. There are private english schools and some public schools that do have english taught as primary language it is just a matter of registar and getting your child to these schools.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/lbpsb/

in other provinces  the students are given some french in public schools but not enough for to converse properly unless you chose to send your child to the few bi lingual schools that  teach most subjects in french instead of english.  All in all Canada is very  multicultural and allows for private schools to be in many language or selected religions  although if you choose this route you must pay directly to the school to send your children as the goverment only funds public schools.

It is unfortunate, but too often those who are responsible for legislation come from those industries making profit from the things they are regulating. IOW it´s a case of the fox watching the chicken coop

If both parents of the child went to a french school they cannot send their child to an english school and the funding for the schools are of provicial jurisdiction not federal and there is a law called law 101 where even the store front signs have to be all in french or else face a fine.

Canada´s official language is English but French is recogninsed under our constitution.  There is only 1 province that is truelly and lawfully bilingual and that is New Brunswick,Quebec is French.

Having said that, when people say that law makers have our best interest at heart I laught, the only best interest they have at heart is what will that law benefit them in the end.