Halal slaughter is the most painless slaughter of all methods.
 

Once you cut the wind pipe, vessel of the neck and throat, the animal dies instantly as the brain responsible for pain is immediately switched off, leading to instant death, with blood flowing out the body can help to prevent diseases and germs which is in the blood, which means healthier meat.

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

This is good news

Is that a video of animals being slaughtered or just someone talking about it?

Someone talking about it with reasons

kewl

Not in my opinion but yeah

k

I've never understood the care with which people apply to slaughtering animals for food. If you're going to be a meat-eater in this day and age (where it's not strictly necessary), at least own up to being blood-thirsty.

In theory the method used in non-halal slughter is far more humane. A bolt to the brain causing instant unconsciousness, rather than being hung upside down and having its throat slit. However much pain the animal may or may not feel after the windpipe is cut it still experiences fear and stress for several seconds after, possibly longer, and the process of having its throat cut can be very painful.

http://www.grandin.com/ritual/welfar...ep.cattle.html


But: the bolt isn't always effective, so in some instances the animal isn't insensible at the point of slaughter. In such cases it's hard to argue that it is more humane.

Done properly, non-halal slaughter is a less stressful end for the animal. It's been designed that way, partly under pressure for more humane treatment of animals, and partly because stress hormones affect the quality and taste of the meat.

No evidence for this whatsoever. It's based on a medieval understanding of the body.

The same fear they will feel when your directing the metal electricuter, the pain from stunning is far more severe and the meat is less healthy when the blood is not drained out, halal slaughter is done in a way the animal doesn't see the knife, the kill has to be done away from other animals which might scare them, the myth that stunning is more humane doesn't really hold weight when your killing an animal that will signal pain. If i had the choice I would rather have a healthy meat that is killed through painless death. Even If i took your argument, you have to still cut the head of the meat once stunned.

I read that as "Hazel" and got really disturbed by the opening sentence. :shocked:

The smell of fear confusion and death will be everywhere however animals are slaughtered...
'Humane slaughter' what a ridiculous phrase.

Yep, the very definition of an oxymoron.

Who you calling a moron!!! ;)

Very nice.

Why do we need the video?

Because there aren't many videos of Muslims killing stuff on the Internet.

Halal is for losers.

Im not particularly bothered with the exact method of killing the animal that the meat i eat comes from as long as its done swiftly enough that it doesnt cause any prolonged suffering.

You can tickle its arse with a feather and call it Bernard while it bleeds out if you want it makes no difference to me.

I dont see any reason to object to any method of dispatching an animal as long as its done quickly.

Farhad is right in the fact that the blood should be drained and the animal should be despatched with as little stress as possible as adrenaline released into the blood will taint the meat.
But i dont agree that stunning or a bolt to the head of the animal seconds before the blood being drained makes any difference as it would take hours for the adrenaline to transfer from the blood to the meat.

As i said both methods are good for me as the animal dies within seconds i only see 1 reason to object to Halal slaughter and that is as a cheap way of showing bigotry to another religion and i dont care for any religion.

I don't have any greater objection to Islam than I do to any other mainstream religion. I have serious doubts as to halal methods being kinder than other methods.

The blood being drained may well lead to more pleasant tasting meat because of the adrenaline, but it's not healthier for the reasons given: the idea that the blood carries disease is based on medieval conceptions of blood's role in the body.

Halal can be humane, but it works differently for different animals. It can take a cow several hundred seconds to die, whereas a sheep may well die in a handful of seconds.

I do agree that in reality the bolt method may not be particularly humane because it is very often not done properly. This has more to do with massified slaugther than the method itself. The same applies to massified halal slaughter.

New abattoirs are generally designed with minimisation of stress in mind. Distance between holding and slaughtering areas, routes between the two etc. But in reality the only truly humane way to slaughter an animal is for it to happen at the farm in small numbers and done quickly. No transportation, no holding pen, and people with some degree of care for the beasts.

We eat too much meat for it to be provided in a truly humane fashion.

I believe Kosher slaughter is quite humane compared to other methods. In reality though, if people were really more concerned with the welfare of the animal there would be higher standards in animal slaughter (although British standards are high compared to other countries) and/or there would be more vegetarians in the world.

Forgive my ignorance Livia but arent the kosher slaughter rules very similar to Halal slaughter?
I really am not sure of the differences.
But i do know its not good to leave the blood in everybody agrees with that.

edit: DanaC i felt a little harsh with my comments as far as you were concerned your points were very valid a few posts above yours werent.
So apologies for grouping you in with those.

I want the meat on my plate to have had a happy life, followed by a swift and painless end.

Sounds OK , perhaps we could try this on you...!!!!

Or we could let him live.