It should strike one as odd that here in Britain a method for slaughtering animals that appears far less humane than it need be, remains in practice. The question, then, is why has the ritual practice of Halal slaughter, required according to dictates of Islamic doctrine, not been outlawed? And why are the sensitives on the left not 'offended' by the unnecssary suffering it causes?
Halal Slaughter in 'Modern' Britain - Why?
Let's get straight to the point; why is it that in a so-called 'modern' western country like Britain we persist in turning a blind eye to, or even defend and excuse, the barbaric ritual method of slaughtering animals, Halal, which is known to cause unnecessary suffering to those animals subjected to it?
The so called ‘blessing’ that is ‘Halal’ is now promoted in a number of supermarket chains around the UK. Indeed not only do they happily advertise the sale of ‘Halal Compliant’ products but appear to pride themselves for doing so. And this is happening slowly but surely, all around a country that has in the past seen more than its fair share of animal rights activism. For this is a country where fox hunting has been banned, a country where extreme animal rights campaigners have resorted to threats of, or actual, violence against perceived acts of cruelty to animals.
In this country innocent people have been murdered in the name of 'animal rights'. This is a country that lauds itself as a leader in the campaign for animal welfare everywhere. A country that lectures other countries on animal cruelty, a country that promotes charities working for the welfare of elephants, donkeys, bears, whales, dogs & cats, and many nearly extinct species worldwide. Yet here we are in ‘modern’ Britain, under the dazzling light of informed ‘reason’ collectively ignoring or excusing a barbaric method of animal slaughter simply because it is dictated by an intolerant, ignorant, backwards-looking, and violent religion and its inherent ideology.
This is of course the Islamic practice of Halal, a ritual method of slaughter handed down from an archaic 14th century culture that has absolutely no place whatsoever in Britain today. It is against everything we stand for in terms of British values regarding animal welfare and rights, as decent human beings, and what we in the west know is best practice - given we must use a means of slaughter that results in minimal suffering (ideally no suffering) for animals farmed or caught for food. So, with the above in mind, here are some questions that you might want to consider:
1) Why is the disgusting ritual practice that ritual Halal slaughter involves apparently sanctioned by the Government and its departments, rather than made clearly illegal, or enforced as unlawful under British law?
2) Why are supermarket chains up and down the country so eagerly sneaking Halal approved meat products into the food chain, expressly against the wishes of the majority of their customers and consumers?
3) Why is there a deafening silence coming from animal rights campaigners and activists (e.g. Animal Rights Movement, Animal Liberation Front, PETA, Animal Aid) when it comes to the Halal issue? Where are the protests and placards? Why no gathering of baying crowds outside offending slaughterhouses or the mosques that enforce Halal ritual slaughter?
4) Where are the myriad animal welfare charities (e.g RSPCA, International Animal Rescue, The Humane Society) on the Halal practice, and why are they so very, very, quiet? Quick to push for prosecution when it's dog-fighting, hare coursing, badger-baiting (all of which are rightfully illegal and should be prosecuted of course) these charities appear completely lacking in moral conviction when confronted with the Islamic ritual practice of Halal slaughter.
Regarding the last point it is interesting to note that according to a report on the website ‘The Week’ the RSPCA have in fact responded to the problem of Halal slaughterhouses in particular. Apparently the RSPCA states that killing animals without stunning (part of the traditional and required practice of Halal) causes unnecessary suffering. Consequently, they have requested that the Government outlaw the practice of Halal slaughter without pre-stunning – a request that has been ignored by the Government.
Moreover, the British government have completely ignored further (EU sanctioned) requests that all Halal slaughtered meat carry a label confirming whether or not it comes from a pre-stunned animal. This appeasement has, as usual, been justified on the grounds it would discriminate against Muslims to enforce such labelling. One might also infer from the Government’s reticence and inaction the implicit assumption that it’s otherwise fine to severe an animal’s throat so as to drain the blood from the body until death – just as long as it’s unconscious. Maybe it is, but Halal doesn’t typically permit pre-stunning in any case.
PETA, for those unaware, are a group of animal rights activists whose past practices have often been extreme or, at least, dubious. They, rightly, point out that Halal slaughter constitutes “prolonged torment” that sees the animal “fight and gasp for their last breath, struggling to stand while the blood drains from their necks”. The sheer horror of this method of slaughter is made the more vivid by The Farm Animal Welfare Council who add that cutting an animal's throat (without pre-stunning) is, “such a massive injury it would result in very significant pain and distress in the period before insensibility supervenes” (they mean ‘intervenes’ of course).
Yet this otherwise motley crew of PETA animal rights warriors then side-step the Halal issue altogether on Twitter (1st Feb, 2018) by suggesting, “there is no such thing as humane meat. Whether you are Jewish, Muslim, or Christian, you should go vegan”.
How convenient PETA but you miss the point, entirely, that if we must slaughter animals (and non-vegans must, or eat them alive?) then the most humane way possible should be pursued. It’s not Christians (or atheists, Jains, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Mormons, Catholics, or even Scientologists) that are advocating an inhumane practice here. No, it’s Muslim butchers, following the teachings of Mohammad and Islam that are doing this.
As for the Jewish practice of Kosher? The answer is very simple, if it’s unnecessarily inhumane, as Halal is, it should be outlawed in just the same way – no one is asking for, or should be expecting, concessions here. The bottom line is simple; are we or are we not trying to be a better, more civilised, more decent, more caring, more humane society? Just what is difficult about this?
To get a clearer picture of just how rabid the deranged political left are when it comes to defending all things Muslim let us turn to Owen Jones, the Guardian newspaper’s chief peddler of progressive liberal propaganda and nonesense. Ordinarily Jones’ slightly psychotic ramblings are not something one should bother to read or respond to but, on this occasion, everybody’s favourite Labour Party retard, and all-round irritant, inadvertently raises a point worth responding to.
Owen Jones is, as most will know, a cognitively challenged nuisance entirely obsessed with promoting homosexuality and extreme-left propaganda (which is why the Labour party and Guardian love him). Naturally, then, in debates like this he defaults to the side of the (perceived) down-trodden, persecuted, and discriminated victim group, in this case the poor Muslim and their religion of peace and love, Islam. Somewhat ironically, but perfectly understandably (if you are an anti-Semitic party's poster boy) he appears never to have been outraged by calls for Kosher slaughter to be banned - strange eh?
Anyway, a few years back Jones wrote (Guardian, 3rd Feb, 2015) a response to those genuinely concerned with the growing problem of (un-stunned) Halal animal slaughter in abattoirs up and down the country. In a nutshell his claim is that such people (those opposed to Halal slaughter) are basically ‘Islamophobes’ only concerned with animal welfare because it involves Muslims, whom they hate anyway. These are people, he suggests, ‘with no prior interest in animal rights’, they are just an ‘anti-Muslim brigade’ that ignore other routine abuses in regular (non-Halal) abattoirs. They should, he stresses, be concerned with all such abuses of animal rights, wherever they are found, and not just those perpetrated by one of his favourite victim groups (Muslims).
In fact, gay rights warrior Owen is quite right in terms of this last criticism, we should be concerned with all abuses of all animals. But he like PETA misses a vital point; it doesn’t follow that because someone is not concerned with all animal welfare issues that their concern with a particular animal welfare issue is invalid or should not be taken up. It’s quite simply wrong-headed to reason in this way, it’s like saying we can’t save the ship's entire crew so we shouldn’t save any of them. Frankly, this is where lazy, prejudicial thinking, of the kind Owen Jones and his friends frequently demonstrate, can get you. It's morally reprehensible with the Child-like underlying premise being something akin to; if you can't (or won't) save victims of Christian ideology you shouldn't save victims of Islamic ideology. Surely, Owen, it is better to save some animals unecessary suffering than no animals at all? This level of reasoning might be more than good enough for the Guardian newspaper’s low standards but not for the rest of us.
Additionally, the dopey Jones misses a crucial issue regarding the Islamic practice of Halal in particular. In Britain there are only around 270,000 Jews (worldwide around 15 million). Even if all British Jews adhered rigorously to the dictates of Kosher (which is obviously not the case) this figure is already dwarfed by the approximately 2.7 million Muslims (1.6 Billion worldwide) presently in the UK. Furthermore, whereas the figures for religious groups like the Jewish population in the UK are fairly stable and increase only incrementally (actually in decline presently) this is just not the case with Muslims. The 2.7 million figure above does not include a swelling number of illegal Muslims presently in the UK - even though they by far outweigh any other religious group entering the country illegally. And it does not take account of the annual growth rate of the Muslim population in general, which out-strips every other group in the UK substantially. But why does any of this matter in the present context?
It matters because the relative number of Halal slaughterhouses catering for this growing Muslim population is becoming greater, vastly greater than, for instance, Kosher establishments. And this means a far greater and increasing number of animals will be suffering unnecessarily in the UK - directly as a result of growth in the population of Muslims and their adherence to barbaric requirements of Islam and the desert goat hearder. The plain truth is all such practice (including Kosher) should be stamped out, but what was previously a smallish problem is now fast becoming an animal abuse disaster in the UK - and that, Owen Jones, is why people are concerned with the rapid growth and assimilation of Halal slaughter in this country, not because they are 'Islamophobes', Nazis, or racist.
In the real world it isn't important what motivates the people objecting to Halal meat. What's important is that a poor and undesirable slaughterhouse methodology is curtailed. If it leads to other poor practices being stamped out then so much the better. The problem with idiotic commentators like Owen Jones is that they simply can’t see past their own deranged, raving, prejudices. Jones and his cohorts are so invested in an extreme (Marxist framed) diversity narrative that they are wantonly blind to anything that might be good outside of their narrow collectivist view of a multicultural utopia.
However, the last point I want to make is perhaps the most telling of all. Notwithstanding the above Owen Jones, and those like him, fail to differentiate between animal abuses in general and that which is peculiar to ritual Halal slaughter. In fact, people, when asked, generally are concerned with all and any abuse of animals, well decent people that is. What makes Halal stand out, however, is not a rabid hate for Muslims, as Jones would have it, but the fact that it is prescribed and dictated as part of the cultural practice and observances of a particular religion – Islam. Moreover, and as if this ideological and religious endorsement was not bad enough, ritual Halal slaughter is further endorsed not only by huge supermarket corporations but the British Government itself.
Owen Jones knows, and implicitly admits, that ritual Halal practice is not the most humane way to slaughter animals, but he’s loath to depart the extremist narrative that he supports against anyone opposed to Islamisation of the UK. So taken is he with this task that, like all extremists on the left, he can’t see past his own prejudiced or deranged thinking. Rather than confront the reality of a barbaric and out-moded ancient practice Jones opts, instead, to lump all animal abuses together. He then points out we should be fighting all animal abuses everywhere and that this is the moral high ground, this is where virtue can be found.
Shifting the focus in this way Jones hopes to deflect or re-direct our attention away from Halal ritual slaughter specifically, if not altogether. The problem is then a broad one, and the Islamic practice is lost in the bigger picture of animal abuses in general. It’s an argument that barely warrants that description, it fails badly, on almost all and any levels. It hinges on the idea that we not look too closely because if you don’t look then you won’t see – sound familiar?