@MoonlightPlaylist I'm not sure whether that means as a society we value animals too much, or women not enough... Personally, I feel that both animal and human suffering are abhorrent.
@AtheistBrit I'd say both, the animals part in certain situations, I mean I'm a vegetarian but even than I know where to draw the line at realistic and extreme.
@chooechooe "Tradition" is no argument for anything. If it was tradition in a country to bait bears (as it used to be in England and a number of other European countries) or to fight bulls (as is still the case in Spain and France) the fact that it's "tradition" doesn't make it any less cruel. What makes Islam (and Judaism with Kosher meat) different is that despite animal welfare laws they are still exempt because of this bullshit "tradition" argument.
Someone mentioned earlier about headless chickens running around. I have seen a headless goose fly away.
This is simply a reflex action from a body. The head is gone, the brain is gone, so all you have left is the reflex trained into the muscles of the body, without the brain giving instructions.
I grew up on a farm and have seen thousands of animals slaughtered and for many years did it myself. I can tel you from personal experience that for larger animals stunning caused less distress and for smaller ones, decapitation was best.
People who have never seen an animal slaughtered simple have no clue what really happens. For the majority of people meat simply appears either shrink wrapped (in the west), or in the market (the rest of the world).
We have to remember that the animal is just as dead either way.
So the debate is not about killing, is is about what is humane killing of animals for our food.
To be honest, a couple of things about this whole debate make me sick. Firstly, I would never eat an animal I could not kill myself.
Secondly, I would never make an animal suffer more than needed. One should not eat the flesh of an animal unless one is willing to do the killing themselves.
I have not looked down the postings, however, I would say that the animal rights point applies equally to Judaism. In fact, Halal is not as strict as Kosher.
I notice that also you errd in the favour of being tolerant, without explaining exactly how animals are killed under Halal or Kosher rules. Would you care to explain in detail for the people here how animals are actually killed under Halal or Kosher rules? It would sicken most people in the west.
AthiestBrit, I appreciate what you are trying to say here, but you have no excuse for "not remembering the details" and saying "if I remember correctly". You should have the details before you make this video. As it stands, it sounds like some arse just made the story up and you are repeating it like a moron. How do you know the story is true if you don't have a clue where it's from?
@tintiringa I hate the Daily Mail. I hate it with a passion. I wouldn't wipe my arse with it.
I don't script my videos and as a result I often bring up subjects where I remember reading something and can't remember where I read it. I'm always happy to be proven wrong if evidence to the contrary comes up, and I would repeat verbatim anything I read/saw if I didn't think it was from a legitimate source. My videos aren't a scripted research paper.
A quick, incisive slit to the throat, that kills the animal instantly, NOT ONLY ensures it hasn't felt pain; the fact that it is not allowed to see the knife NOT ONLY ensures it hasn't felt fear, but above all that, before it was killed, the animal was BLESSED in the name of God. BLESSED. You probably don't see significance in that as an atheist, but that would be about similar to saying "may good things come from this." Gee, what cruel/violent/ hate-and-evil loving ppl we are...
@iBegToDiffer The British Government has established that animals slaughtered without pre-stunning experience "very significant pain and distress". The Farm Animal Welfare Council, which is charged with telling ministers how to promote humane treatment, had said that slaughtering without first stunning an animal was "unacceptable".
@AtheistBrit Thanks for your response- with a bit a research, I can say I regret, and recant my position that all halal slaughter is always humane and that there is "no pain" felt- I realize this is due to the variability of the practices in slaughterhouse and by slaughterers, the variability of the equipment used, the attitude towards the animal etc. It does not always align with Islamic prescriptions. With that being said, I still stand by my initial assumption that when prescribed halal
@iBegToDiffer slaughter is followed PROPERLY no, or very little pain is felt for the animal- and that it should be allowed. I stand by this for a few reasons
1. Very massive cuts made into vital arteries in the neck drop blood pressure considerably and suffocate oxygen to the brain. Of course, the knife must be sharp, and the incision made, precise and thorough. If this is done, the animal should fall unconscious shortly and the perception of pain likewise should cease.
2. Studies such as Bogart (1927) support that resistance movements the animal makes after the incision cannot be taken as signs of consciousness or perception of pain. Indeed, as the heart is still pumping- convulsing or movement in the body is a reflex reaction of the spinal cord.
3. Even if, for whatever reason, a little pain is felt by the animal- I do not see how this can be brandished wholeheartedly as a "cruel and inhumane" practice. How is this significantly ...
@iBegToDiffer worse than the common method of stunning with a penetrating captive bolt (most prevalent form of stunning cattle in the EU) which essentially dashes the brains of the cattle to render it unconscious?
@iBegToDiffer Animals are ost definitely NOT "killed instantly". Calves, in particular, take much longer than other species to die after throat-cutting. A 1995 study found that their brains could still be active for 104 seconds. Other experiments raised that figure to 126 seconds.
@AtheistBrit they may not be killed instantly, but ideally, the animals fall unconscious before they die.
Being unconscious does not stipulate that the brain is not active. Our brains are active when we sleep, and yet, when we sleep we are in an unconscious state. The fact that their brains are active does not disprove these animals are unconscious.
@iBegToDiffer Possible reasons for the suffering are laid out in various research papers that Compassion in World Farming has collected. After the throat is cut, large clots can form at the severed ends of the carotid arteries, leading to occlusion of the wound (or "ballooning" as it is known in the slaughtering trade).
Occlusions slow blood loss from the carotids and delay the decline in blood pressure that prevents the suffering brain from blacking out. In one group of calves, 62.5 per cent suffered from ballooning. Even if the slaughterman is a master of his craft and the cut to the neck is clean, blood is carried to the brain by vertebral arteries and it keeps cattle conscious of their pain.
@AtheistBrit Vertebral arteries are jointed with the carotid arteries, and as blood follows the route of least resistance- when there is a large severe to in the neck- blood pumped up the vertebral spills out through the carotids. In the case where there is ballooning, and the arteries are partially blocked however- the amount of blood the vertebral would provide the brain has been deemed by some scientists as not enough to support consciousness.
@AtheistBrit Ballooning or the clotting of the carotid arteries has been shown to be likely to occur when the butcher is using a blunt knife. The 62.5 percent figure you suggest, does not surprise as the calves were all from the same group, must likely being butchered by the same person- likely using a blunt knife. There is also the risk it might occur with a sharp knife, but that is unlikely.
@iBegToDiffer "above all that, before it was killed, the animal was BLESSED in the name of God. BLESSED. You probably don't see significance in that as an atheist..." No, I don't see the significance of a few spoken words when an animal is suffering. Words do nothing to alleviate unnecessary suffering.
You are talking out of your arse. Halal slaughter does NOT kill the animal instantly. I performed this ridiculous ritual many times when I was a muslim. The animals flop and writhe and scream and breathe for minutes.
What I want to know is are you deliberately lying because the average Brit will never see a halal slaughter and thus not be able to call your bullshit? Or are you just an fool who has never seen a halal slaughter?
@tintiringa i have seen halal slaughter (videos- PETA), and am not pleased with the current state of it. i see many things that do not follows standard/ ascribed islamic pratices. for instance, not allowing the animal to see the knife, or not allowing other animals to see the each other being killed. enlighten me- have you followed, strictly, islamic practice in your own experiences?
Have you seen the video "meat your meat" before? If not, I suggest you do. YT it. It's eye opening. And it scares me, as a Muslim.To think, gee, if I weren't eating halal food, I could be eating meat that comes from THAT.
I can tell you, though, as someone who eats halal food- I'm delighted to know the animal on my plate goes through NOTHING of that sort. No beatings. No "stunnings" (which, uh, incidentally, causes pain for some animals) and no "cruelty". (Contrary to your assertion).
Good vid, one comment though. Peer does mean people of the same type of group.
The rest of the vid was spot on. It is time that religions were stripped of their special treatment by governments. So no more tax free status, no more Sharia Courts, no more allowing a church to discipline those that break laws of the land, but are handed over to police and treated as everyone else are treated, no better no worse.
@Knightyme "Peer does mean people of the same type of group." - yeah probably a poor choice of words there! You get my meaning though, I guess. I agree with your comment completely!
Larger animals are often hung upside down before their throats are split. In the case of cows this restricts their breathing and most animals dont' like being hung upside down as it's unatural for them and they panic.
@imr22 I know. It really upsets me and I think many people don't realise just how cruel it is and will happily eat Halal meat at a restaurant without knowing what they're supporting.
What something wrong with Islam? Insert evil laugh here, joking. I think there is a tone of shit wrong with religion let alone the Islamic religion. Thank goodness Canada said no to Islamic law which socked me de to the fact Canada never wants to look racist. I think it is so weird how the scales of marriage in religion including Islam are so unbalanced, anything goes as long as they don't divorce. let’s see the scale of bad to worst rape beating kids murder and at the top Divorce
I am pretty sure you are exaggerating the power of Sharia courts. The can act as arbitrators in marital disputes and pass binding decision, but only if both parties agree to it. They don't preside over criminal cases in the normal sense and a Muslim cannot insist on being tried in a Sharia court for offences like assault, theft etc. It has to be by mutual consent.
I don't think that they should exist, but there has been a lot of scare mongering and misinformation about this.
@gabiotta Thanks for the clarification. However, in the case of this particular woman this didn't help much. She was coerced into not criminally prosecuting her husband and allowing the case to be tried in the Sharia court, which effectively provided the husband with institutionalised assistance to get away with domestic violence (both before AND after the event).
Thank you however for pointing out the limitations of Sharia courts - I was remembering the case from a couple of years ago and didn't have the details to hand as to the exact powers these courts do and don't have.
Then that is clearly wrong. There must still be recourse in law available to her though, if she demonstrates that she was coerced.
I am not being an apologist for Sharia here. I don't feel comfortable with religious systems of law in any sense. I just feel that the waters around these issues have become so muddied recently.
@gabiotta Islam goes on and on about how the religion favours women over men. How Muslim women are treated like presses things to be looked after and taken care off. Talk is cheap and the actions of Islamic courts against women and the amount of spousal abuse that goes under punished or not punished at all specks volumes
I'ts funny how women are being abused but all the comments are about animals.
MoonlightPlaylist 1 month ago
@MoonlightPlaylist I'm not sure whether that means as a society we value animals too much, or women not enough... Personally, I feel that both animal and human suffering are abhorrent.
AtheistBrit 1 month ago
@AtheistBrit I'd say both, the animals part in certain situations, I mean I'm a vegetarian but even than I know where to draw the line at realistic and extreme.
MoonlightPlaylist 1 month ago
They're animals, who cares.. They're going to die either way.
zXxSinDitxXz 8 months ago
@zXxSinDitxXz That's a very sad attitude to take. It you're indifferent to an animal in pain, that says a lot about you. :(
AtheistBrit 8 months ago
are you really arguing about the way they kill animals? its a tradition and im pretty sure british people have inhumane traditions.
chooechooe 10 months ago
@chooechooe "Tradition" is no argument for anything. If it was tradition in a country to bait bears (as it used to be in England and a number of other European countries) or to fight bulls (as is still the case in Spain and France) the fact that it's "tradition" doesn't make it any less cruel. What makes Islam (and Judaism with Kosher meat) different is that despite animal welfare laws they are still exempt because of this bullshit "tradition" argument.
AtheistBrit 10 months ago 2
@AtheistBrit that is only your opinion.
ill give you my opinion. animals are not that important
chooechooe 10 months ago
@chooechooe It's not opinion that animals are capable of suffering.
AtheistBrit 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@chooechooe i guess you're not that important so? dumbass....
ThomasJKH 8 months ago
Someone mentioned earlier about headless chickens running around. I have seen a headless goose fly away.
This is simply a reflex action from a body. The head is gone, the brain is gone, so all you have left is the reflex trained into the muscles of the body, without the brain giving instructions.
marsoft4647 1 year ago
I grew up on a farm and have seen thousands of animals slaughtered and for many years did it myself. I can tel you from personal experience that for larger animals stunning caused less distress and for smaller ones, decapitation was best.
People who have never seen an animal slaughtered simple have no clue what really happens. For the majority of people meat simply appears either shrink wrapped (in the west), or in the market (the rest of the world).
(continued)
marsoft4647 1 year ago 3
We have to remember that the animal is just as dead either way.
So the debate is not about killing, is is about what is humane killing of animals for our food.
To be honest, a couple of things about this whole debate make me sick. Firstly, I would never eat an animal I could not kill myself.
Secondly, I would never make an animal suffer more than needed. One should not eat the flesh of an animal unless one is willing to do the killing themselves.
(continued)
marsoft4647 1 year ago 3
That simple rule would make most people vegitarian I think. (If sufficient other foods were available)
marsoft4647 1 year ago
I have not looked down the postings, however, I would say that the animal rights point applies equally to Judaism. In fact, Halal is not as strict as Kosher.
I notice that also you errd in the favour of being tolerant, without explaining exactly how animals are killed under Halal or Kosher rules. Would you care to explain in detail for the people here how animals are actually killed under Halal or Kosher rules? It would sicken most people in the west.
marsoft4647 1 year ago
AthiestBrit, I appreciate what you are trying to say here, but you have no excuse for "not remembering the details" and saying "if I remember correctly". You should have the details before you make this video. As it stands, it sounds like some arse just made the story up and you are repeating it like a moron. How do you know the story is true if you don't have a clue where it's from?
Sources please. (Daily Mail I bet)
tintiringa 1 year ago
@tintiringa I hate the Daily Mail. I hate it with a passion. I wouldn't wipe my arse with it.
I don't script my videos and as a result I often bring up subjects where I remember reading something and can't remember where I read it. I'm always happy to be proven wrong if evidence to the contrary comes up, and I would repeat verbatim anything I read/saw if I didn't think it was from a legitimate source. My videos aren't a scripted research paper.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 4
Actually the islamic way is nicest way to the animal. And the cleanest for the person to eat.
toppsypoppsy 1 year ago
@toppsypoppsy Please read the comments I posted back to "iBegToDiffer" regarding the cruelty of not pre-stunning the animal.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
..cont'd.
A quick, incisive slit to the throat, that kills the animal instantly, NOT ONLY ensures it hasn't felt pain; the fact that it is not allowed to see the knife NOT ONLY ensures it hasn't felt fear, but above all that, before it was killed, the animal was BLESSED in the name of God. BLESSED. You probably don't see significance in that as an atheist, but that would be about similar to saying "may good things come from this." Gee, what cruel/violent/ hate-and-evil loving ppl we are...
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer The British Government has established that animals slaughtered without pre-stunning experience "very significant pain and distress". The Farm Animal Welfare Council, which is charged with telling ministers how to promote humane treatment, had said that slaughtering without first stunning an animal was "unacceptable".
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit Thanks for your response- with a bit a research, I can say I regret, and recant my position that all halal slaughter is always humane and that there is "no pain" felt- I realize this is due to the variability of the practices in slaughterhouse and by slaughterers, the variability of the equipment used, the attitude towards the animal etc. It does not always align with Islamic prescriptions. With that being said, I still stand by my initial assumption that when prescribed halal
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer slaughter is followed PROPERLY no, or very little pain is felt for the animal- and that it should be allowed. I stand by this for a few reasons
1. Very massive cuts made into vital arteries in the neck drop blood pressure considerably and suffocate oxygen to the brain. Of course, the knife must be sharp, and the incision made, precise and thorough. If this is done, the animal should fall unconscious shortly and the perception of pain likewise should cease.
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer
2. Studies such as Bogart (1927) support that resistance movements the animal makes after the incision cannot be taken as signs of consciousness or perception of pain. Indeed, as the heart is still pumping- convulsing or movement in the body is a reflex reaction of the spinal cord.
3. Even if, for whatever reason, a little pain is felt by the animal- I do not see how this can be brandished wholeheartedly as a "cruel and inhumane" practice. How is this significantly ...
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer worse than the common method of stunning with a penetrating captive bolt (most prevalent form of stunning cattle in the EU) which essentially dashes the brains of the cattle to render it unconscious?
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer Animals are ost definitely NOT "killed instantly". Calves, in particular, take much longer than other species to die after throat-cutting. A 1995 study found that their brains could still be active for 104 seconds. Other experiments raised that figure to 126 seconds.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit they may not be killed instantly, but ideally, the animals fall unconscious before they die.
Being unconscious does not stipulate that the brain is not active. Our brains are active when we sleep, and yet, when we sleep we are in an unconscious state. The fact that their brains are active does not disprove these animals are unconscious.
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer Possible reasons for the suffering are laid out in various research papers that Compassion in World Farming has collected. After the throat is cut, large clots can form at the severed ends of the carotid arteries, leading to occlusion of the wound (or "ballooning" as it is known in the slaughtering trade).
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
Occlusions slow blood loss from the carotids and delay the decline in blood pressure that prevents the suffering brain from blacking out. In one group of calves, 62.5 per cent suffered from ballooning. Even if the slaughterman is a master of his craft and the cut to the neck is clean, blood is carried to the brain by vertebral arteries and it keeps cattle conscious of their pain.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit Vertebral arteries are jointed with the carotid arteries, and as blood follows the route of least resistance- when there is a large severe to in the neck- blood pumped up the vertebral spills out through the carotids. In the case where there is ballooning, and the arteries are partially blocked however- the amount of blood the vertebral would provide the brain has been deemed by some scientists as not enough to support consciousness.
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit Ballooning or the clotting of the carotid arteries has been shown to be likely to occur when the butcher is using a blunt knife. The 62.5 percent figure you suggest, does not surprise as the calves were all from the same group, must likely being butchered by the same person- likely using a blunt knife. There is also the risk it might occur with a sharp knife, but that is unlikely.
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer "above all that, before it was killed, the animal was BLESSED in the name of God. BLESSED. You probably don't see significance in that as an atheist..." No, I don't see the significance of a few spoken words when an animal is suffering. Words do nothing to alleviate unnecessary suffering.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago 3
@iBegToDiffer "kills the animal instantly".
You are talking out of your arse. Halal slaughter does NOT kill the animal instantly. I performed this ridiculous ritual many times when I was a muslim. The animals flop and writhe and scream and breathe for minutes.
What I want to know is are you deliberately lying because the average Brit will never see a halal slaughter and thus not be able to call your bullshit? Or are you just an fool who has never seen a halal slaughter?
tintiringa 1 year ago 6
@tintiringa i have seen halal slaughter (videos- PETA), and am not pleased with the current state of it. i see many things that do not follows standard/ ascribed islamic pratices. for instance, not allowing the animal to see the knife, or not allowing other animals to see the each other being killed. enlighten me- have you followed, strictly, islamic practice in your own experiences?
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
@iBegToDiffer "have you followed, strictly, islamic practice in your own experiences?"
Yes - when killing individual animals (eg, for dinner), no - when killing larges volumes (eg for weddings).
The animals suffer either way. Heard the phrase "running around like a headless chicken"? Well, having the head still on doesn't make much difference.
tintiringa 1 year ago
Have you seen the video "meat your meat" before? If not, I suggest you do. YT it. It's eye opening. And it scares me, as a Muslim.To think, gee, if I weren't eating halal food, I could be eating meat that comes from THAT.
I can tell you, though, as someone who eats halal food- I'm delighted to know the animal on my plate goes through NOTHING of that sort. No beatings. No "stunnings" (which, uh, incidentally, causes pain for some animals) and no "cruelty". (Contrary to your assertion).
iBegToDiffer 1 year ago
Hmm... sometimes I wonder if Islam is the cult that going to take over the world. leaving that aside... when are we going to pillow fight?
getcho01 1 year ago
Really good point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but you are a woman so you view doesn't matter.
getcho01 1 year ago
@getcho01 ROFL!!! That's a wicked sense of humour you've got there! :D
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
Comment removed
getcho01 1 year ago
Good vid, one comment though. Peer does mean people of the same type of group.
The rest of the vid was spot on. It is time that religions were stripped of their special treatment by governments. So no more tax free status, no more Sharia Courts, no more allowing a church to discipline those that break laws of the land, but are handed over to police and treated as everyone else are treated, no better no worse.
Knightyme 1 year ago
@Knightyme "Peer does mean people of the same type of group." - yeah probably a poor choice of words there! You get my meaning though, I guess. I agree with your comment completely!
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
Religion does NOT belong in the justice system. Britain should ban the Shariah courts.
esh325 1 year ago
★★★★★
Katalyzt 1 year ago
Larger animals are often hung upside down before their throats are split. In the case of cows this restricts their breathing and most animals dont' like being hung upside down as it's unatural for them and they panic.
Halal slaughter is quite cruel.
imr22 1 year ago
@imr22 I know. It really upsets me and I think many people don't realise just how cruel it is and will happily eat Halal meat at a restaurant without knowing what they're supporting.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
What something wrong with Islam? Insert evil laugh here, joking. I think there is a tone of shit wrong with religion let alone the Islamic religion. Thank goodness Canada said no to Islamic law which socked me de to the fact Canada never wants to look racist. I think it is so weird how the scales of marriage in religion including Islam are so unbalanced, anything goes as long as they don't divorce. let’s see the scale of bad to worst rape beating kids murder and at the top Divorce
Cheers C
christinepeace 1 year ago
I am pretty sure you are exaggerating the power of Sharia courts. The can act as arbitrators in marital disputes and pass binding decision, but only if both parties agree to it. They don't preside over criminal cases in the normal sense and a Muslim cannot insist on being tried in a Sharia court for offences like assault, theft etc. It has to be by mutual consent.
I don't think that they should exist, but there has been a lot of scare mongering and misinformation about this.
gabiotta 1 year ago
@gabiotta Thanks for the clarification. However, in the case of this particular woman this didn't help much. She was coerced into not criminally prosecuting her husband and allowing the case to be tried in the Sharia court, which effectively provided the husband with institutionalised assistance to get away with domestic violence (both before AND after the event).
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
Thank you however for pointing out the limitations of Sharia courts - I was remembering the case from a couple of years ago and didn't have the details to hand as to the exact powers these courts do and don't have.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
@AtheistBrit
Then that is clearly wrong. There must still be recourse in law available to her though, if she demonstrates that she was coerced.
I am not being an apologist for Sharia here. I don't feel comfortable with religious systems of law in any sense. I just feel that the waters around these issues have become so muddied recently.
Love your intro btw.
gabiotta 1 year ago
@gabiotta Islam goes on and on about how the religion favours women over men. How Muslim women are treated like presses things to be looked after and taken care off. Talk is cheap and the actions of Islamic courts against women and the amount of spousal abuse that goes under punished or not punished at all specks volumes
cheers C
christinepeace 1 year ago