Halal

Andrew Flexing

Hi all,

Just wanted to ask about Halal. If all the procedures in the time up until slaughter are followed is it possilbe to stun (ie captive bolt) the immeadiately animal prior to its neck being cut....? Is this still Halal if prepared this way?

thanks

wes

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Hi all,

Just wanted to ask about Halal. If all the procedures in the time up until slaughter are followed is it possilbe to stun (ie captive bolt) the immeadiately animal prior to its neck being cut....? Is this still Halal if prepared this way?

thanks

Stunning is considered fine amongst some Muslims, and others are against it.

I think most Halal meat in Europe is stunned afaik, and in the Middle East and Muslim majority nations, they are not stunned. Not a 100% sure on that btw.

I found some information from a BBC article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18187137

But EU research from 2006 indicated that 75% of cattle, 93% of sheep and 100% of chickens slaughtered in the UK for halal meat were stunned prior to their deaths. Figures produced by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in 2011 give a similar picture: 84%, 81% and 88%, respectively.

So in practice, most Muslims in the EU it would seem from the figures, are eating Halal meat that is stunned.

Andrew Flexing

Thanks for that link...

So is there no generally accepted practice? I mean, I see a lot of "Halal sold here" type of signs in shops windows lately but if the rendering unconscious can be accepted in prep of halal meats what makes it different to non-halal meats? Is it the prayer said prior and/or the 3 day preparation period before slaughter the only difference?

I spoke to a Muslim preacher in Dublin recently about this and he said that Mohammed was "very respectful" of animals yet this same preacher refused to consider the stunning prior to slaughter as "this was not the way Mohammed did it in the Koran", (although this preacher also said that animals don't feel pain).

I don't any see reason why halal bound animals cannot be afforded this procedure of stunning and also why those who don't not want this, oppose it.

I'd be interested to hear any Muslims opinions on this...

wes

I think those who are against stunning issues, is that they want the animal to be alive when the throat is slit, and they don't trust that stunning won't kill them. This to my understanding is the biggest concern.

As for the difference between Halal and regular meat, for most Halal in Europe it does seem to be the prayer that is the main difference, as most seems to be stunned.

I don't really see this as a big issue really, as most Halal in Europe is per the earlier figures is stunned.

MrPudding

wes wrote: »

I don't really see this as a big issue really, as most Halal in Europe is per the earlier figures is stunned.

WOuld you be similarly happy if, for example, most children in school were not physically abused?

MrP

wes

MrPudding wrote: »

WOuld you be similarly happy if, for example, most children in school were not physically abused?

MrP

You comparison is really rather nasty, and belittling the victims of child abuse. Utterly repugnant to compare victims of abuse to animals. I take it your sole purpose is to pick a fight and nothing more. Honestly, you could do better, and not you know compare abused children to animals while your at it.

Also, you will find that in non-Halal animal slaughter plenty of abuses, not to mention how there raised etc. Its always funny to see such an intense interest in Halal only, all the while ignoring that the vast majority of it is not all that different than other methods of slaughter, and you know ignore the realities of how meat gets to your table.

I think its more than fair to point out the fact that the vast majority of Halal slaughter is stunned, as most critics tend to ignore that rather inconvenient fact just to have a go and **** stir, hence why I said why I don't see why its such a big deal.

Andrew Flexing

To be honest...I thought none of the Halal meats were stunned, Im really surprised at that figure.

I do agree that there are issues with non-halal meat slaughter though I do take the stance that stunning is far more humane than not doing so. I think its greta to talk about these things and not reduce it by troll comments.

For clarity...maybe I'm being pedantic...does the Koran say if the animal should be conscious upon slaughter or anything to that effect? If not then stunned halal and stunned non-halal differ very little-is that a fair comment?

confusedquark

I've come across two opinions on stunning - firstly, the Irish Department of Halal Certification (yes, apparently they exist) say that it cannot be accepted, as the act of stunning itself has many problems (e.g. animals often die during stunning itself, it can cause blood to get into the final meat product, and can potentially cause more physical/psychological trauma to the animal).

Another opinion I came across is that "If it is ascertained that the claim of the experts is correct in that stunning does minimize the suffering of the animal, and also the animal does not die prior to the actual slaughtering, then it would be permissible to use the method of stunning, otherwise impermissible. This of course, is very difficult to determine whilst buying from meat shops, thus one should avoid it totally."

So, I suppose if a halal meat factory can validate that all the stunned animals are not dead before slaughter (and perhaps sell ones that do die to other sources), then it could be considered ok, but individuals probably will differ in their opinions. As far as I'm aware, most Halal meat that comes from factories around Ireland is also stunned.

As regards the difference between stunned Halal and stunned non-Halal meat, the prayer and eventual throat-cutting aside, Halal meat should also have the animal's blood completely drained after the slaughter. I don't think the animal needs to be conscious. There's a very good article referencing Quranic verses on the topic here.

Tom Dunne

MrPudding wrote: »

WOuld you be similarly happy if, for example, most children in school were not physically abused?

MrP

That is a totally unacceptable comment.

Comparing the slaughter of animals for consumption to the abuse of children is obscenely offensive.

Please do not post any more in this thread or I will be banning you from the forum.

Bellatori

This is a subject that poses quite some argument amongst animal rights groups particularly

As in most western countries, Dutch law dictates that butchers must stun livestock – render it unconscious – before slaughter, to minimise pain and fear. But an exception is made for meat prepared under ancient Jewish and Muslim dietary laws.These demand that animals be slaughtered while still awake, by swiftly cutting the main neck arteries with razor-sharp knives. Most Dutch favour a ban. The procedures are already banned in New Zealand, Scandinavian and Baltic countries and Switzerland.

Which is the most cruel is also disputed. When I was four, my grandfather used to keep a pig. I remember riding around on its back. It was almost a pet. It was killed by sticking a sharp knife in its throat and allowed to run around squealing. Apparently (allegedly) this is good for the meat. I doubt he would get away with that nowadays.

But Jewish and Muslim groups have called the bill an affront to freedom of religion.

Should wider societal rights over rule 'freedom of religion'. We get very politically correct at this point and yet the answer must be yes. I personally feel that we allow religions in general to much leeway and should exert pressure on all of them to weed out unacceptable practices but is this one of them. It is, I think, significant, that most of the lamb that comes from New Zealand is apparently halal even though it is not marketed as such.

If the process of halal is not cruel then the NZ approach is fine. It causes me no harm, inconvenience or qualms of conscience and it keeps the Jewish and Muslims happy. Win win. If, as some claim, it is cruel then, religion or no, it should be banned.

Tom Dunne

///3power banned for breach of the forum charter, specifically for the section on attacking western culture and beliefs