Dutch Muslims & Jews united together

[Neil]

Yeah, sorry for siding with defenseless animals over sadistic savages with knives. That indeed makes me horrible. I hope all the blood of dying animals keeps your warm inside, motherfucker.

You know what keeps me warm inside?  My metabolism.

But the certainty that the savages with knives will one day come for you helps.

[Neil]

I don't mock Dr. Grandin, at least I get her title right.

That's not very democratic of you, is it?

[Slargos]

There are more "humane" ways of slaughtering animals for consumption.

A far more significant factor in "humanity" of animal slaughter than ritual vs. non-ritual methods are the means actually used to carry those out and the experience and skill of slaughtermen.  That it seems to me augurs in favor of the ritual methods because generally speaking there are higher requirements for slaughterman skill (and the meat commands a higher price).

But the bigger point is that if one is really interested in reducing discomfort for the animal, there are long lists of matters to be addressed of potentially greater impact than this one.  That suggests that the motivation here is probably not an abstract concern for animal welfare.

I would think that someone concerned with animal welfare would spend more time worrying about how animals live, rather than about the precise way that they die.  I'm pretty sure if you could ask a cow, they wouldn't be thrilled about any of the different means of slaughtering them.

I'm pretty sure you can ask a cow, but I doubt you'd get much of an intelligent reply.

Much like when talking at Danes. 

[garbon]

The real issue here is that the weight of rabbinical opinion is that stunning is not kosher.  So in practice eliminating the exemption means eliminating these businesses because their customers won't buy the meat.

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

[Neil]

The real issue here is that the weight of rabbinical opinion is that stunning is not kosher.  So in practice eliminating the exemption means eliminating these businesses because their customers won't buy the meat.

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

But that's not really the issue here.  The issue is that the Dutch are racist.

[The Minsky Moment]

I don't mock Dr. Grandin, at least I get her title right. I highlighted a different part of your reference pointing out that you were highlighting a part which is comparing apples to oranges.

We Yanks aren't so fastidious about Herr Professor Doktor titles.
The part you highlighted is not in dispute.  A *properly* conducted stunning can part of a humane slaughter method if it is accompanied by other best practices.  That does not mean that kosher ritual slaughter can not also be humane (comparatively). 

The most significant takeaway from the article as a whole is that issues like restraints and training levels of personnel are potentially far more significant issues.  Yet rather than focus on these concerns, the politicians are targeting the dusky-hued semitic zealots and their supposedly barbaric ways.

[Slargos]

The real issue here is that the weight of rabbinical opinion is that stunning is not kosher.  So in practice eliminating the exemption means eliminating these businesses because their customers won't buy the meat.

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

But that's not really the issue here.  The issue is that the Dutch are racist.

"Late shall the sinner awaken" 

[garbon]

The real issue here is that the weight of rabbinical opinion is that stunning is not kosher.  So in practice eliminating the exemption means eliminating these businesses because their customers won't buy the meat.

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

But that's not really the issue here.  The issue is that the Dutch are racist.

It's the issue in SF where there is going to be a ballot measure to ban circumcision.

[Martinus]

The real issue here is that the weight of rabbinical opinion is that stunning is not kosher.  So in practice eliminating the exemption means eliminating these businesses because their customers won't buy the meat.

Well, sorry then. Buh-bye.

[The Minsky Moment]

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

In the USA you don't have to, because the Constitution guarantees free exercise.  So if the Amish want to drive their horse drawn-buggies, or if the Mormons want to wear their special undergarments, or the Sikhs their turbans, or if the Catholics want to erect huge statutes of a classical-era Jew on a Roman torture device, then they get to do all those things even if others think it is gauche and terribly out of fashion.

I would have thought that religious freedom counted for more in the Netherlands but perhaps not.

[Viking]

I don't mock Dr. Grandin, at least I get her title right. I highlighted a different part of your reference pointing out that you were highlighting a part which is comparing apples to oranges.

We Yanks aren't so fastidious about Herr Professor Doktor titles.
The part you highlighted is not in dispute.  A *properly* conducted stunning can part of a humane slaughter method if it is accompanied by other best practices.  That does not mean that kosher ritual slaughter can not also be humane (comparatively). 

The most significant takeaway from the article as a whole is that issues like restraints and training levels of personnel are potentially far more significant issues.  Yet rather than focus on these concerns, the politicians are targeting the dusky-hued semitic zealots and their supposedly barbaric ways.

So, your argument is that Religious rules can be used to justify less than best practice methods of slaughter? Politicians are idiots and specialists like Dr. Grandin and her colleagues in the field of animal welfare constantly suggest improvement in the methods of slaughter. We listen to these experts, not rabbis or mullahs. We do not consider arguments from holy books.

Crying anti-semetism on this issue is pretty weak. Racists have grasped on to this issue without a doubt. The rules for humane slaughter of animals were set by the experts, not the johnny come lately racists getting the headlines today.

[Slargos]

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

In the USA you don't have to, because the Constitution guarantees free exercise.  So if the Amish want to drive their horse drawn-buggies, or if the Mormons want to wear their special undergarments, or the Sikhs their turbans, or if the Catholics want to erect huge statutes of a classical-era Jew on a Roman torture device, then they get to do all those things even if others think it is gauche and terribly out of fashion.

I would have thought that religious freedom counted for more in the Netherlands but perhaps not.

My religion calls for the exsanguination of all Jews before consumption.

Does this fall under freedom of exersise? 

[Martinus]

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

In the USA you don't have to, because the Constitution guarantees free exercise.  So if the Amish want to drive their horse drawn-buggies, or if the Mormons want to wear their special undergarments, or the Sikhs their turbans, or if the Catholics want to erect huge statutes of a classical-era Jew on a Roman torture device, then they get to do all those things even if others think it is gauche and terribly out of fashion.

I would have thought that religious freedom counted for more in the Netherlands but perhaps not.

My religion calls for the exsanguination of all Jews before consumption.

Does this fall under freedom of exersise? 

It's kinda sad and funny how they don't get it, isn't it?

[garbon]

Well I guess it sucks to be in a segment of a religion where your views can't adjust with the times.

In the USA you don't have to, because the Constitution guarantees free exercise.  So if the Amish want to drive their horse drawn-buggies, or if the Mormons want to wear their special undergarments, or the Sikhs their turbans, or if the Catholics want to erect huge statutes of a classical-era Jew on a Roman torture device, then they get to do all those things even if others think it is gauche and terribly out of fashion.

I would have thought that religious freedom counted for more in the Netherlands but perhaps not.

It doesn't seem odd to you that the Dutch require everyone else to stun animals before slaughter but Jews and Muslims get a religious exception? I don't really think that's what freedom of religion is supposed to mean.

[Slargos]

The Jews and their lackeys the Carpetbaggers have no respect for life, and do not consider the rights of anyone but the Chosen. It is not unsurprising.