[Foobar]

It's not necessarily about stopping anyone doing anything.  It's about debating the welfare issues surrounding this subject, and labeling  produce so that the consumer can make their own mind up.  I mean who knew all NZ lamb has been pre-stunned Halal for years?  certainly not me.

Let's not get into any arguments about religion please, this isn't the place for that.

[jaykay]

I disagree that it's not about stopping people doing things. It is. It's about a value judgement about how we (society here as a whole) want things to be done. Which values we think have priority over others. And then stopping people doing things that are against those values/priorities.

And as for not talking about 'religion and politics' - sure, it avoids arguments but it also avoids talking about many things that matter. They both impinge upon many aspects of life, including, it seems, smallholding.

[devonlad]

Agree totally with Jaykay. one of the best things about growing my own meat is knowing how it lived and how it died. for that reason I have never and will never sell my stock at market. I then have no say in what becomes of them alive or dead- and that matters to me.
Regardless of what (or whose) name it is done in, animal cruelty is animal cruelty.

[jaykay]

I think the trouble with that, as presented CastleFarm, is what constitutes 'incomers' and what's 'British'?

Angles, Celts, Saxons, Normans, Vikings........?

You get the drift. To fix society at a particular point in time and say 'then it was British, these 'new' people aren't' is both flawed and divisive and just has folk hating each other, which is a waste of energy, amongst much else.

The trick is for us, all together in Britain, to decide what we want. And then insist everyone abides by that. Rather than having one set of rules for one group, another for a different group. That's what gets people cross.

Britons are pretty tolerant, which is great. When that morphs into 'we really mustn't upset anyone so we won't ever discuss or challenge anything', well IMHO not so great.

[Foobar]

They both impinge upon many aspects of life, including, it seems, smallholding.

Alas yes, they do. *sigh*

The trouble with religion is that you can't really legislate against it.  If some people hold a deep religious belief on a particular subject  then nothing will stop that.  It won't matter if there are laws in place to outlaw non-stun slaughter, the practice will just go underground.  It will take several generations to change peoples mindsets through education etc. 

It would probably be better in the short term to have things licensed and labelled so that a consumer can choose to have no part in something that they don't agree with.  It is knowledge that is the key - if we as consumers have more awareness of what is actually being sold to us then we can change things, vote with your £.  If Pizza Express suddenly find now that no one wants to eat their pizzas because they have (pre stunned) Halal chicken on them, then they will change.  Knowledge, not conflict.

Personally I think I object more to someone saying a prayer over my meat than someone killing it without stunning it!  But that's just me .

[jaykay]

I think there's a part for both education and labelling, but also for laws and law enforcement.

As for the stun/prayer - I might find the prayer strange but I suspect the sheep I've sent for slaughter doesn't have a view, whereas it might well have a preference on stun/no stun.

[Q]

I would be happy to achieve legislation that states whether the animal was stunned before it was killed or not.

Then I could choose what I buy rather than have some method imposed on me because it has a religious aspect to it.

I dont care much about the religion, I care for the animal's welfare, EVERY animal's welfare.

Give me information and choice - I dont have that now.

If enough people agree that non stunning slaughter is disagreeable then it will happen less..... maybe.

[Cactus Jack]

I personally object to any religion telling me how I should or should not do something. I breed, raise, slaughter and butcher ALL my own totally organic meat ( goats, pigs, ducks chickens and turkeys)
I would not dream of killing a pig or a goat without first stunning it.
I also apologise and say thank you to the animal.
What companies like Pizza Hut etc do, I don't care about, because I wouldn't eat that processed muck in the first place

[jaykay]

I also apologise and say thank you to the animal

Me too.

And I think that's what the 'saying a prayer' is about as well - showing respect and gratitude.

So when you remove the details of the practices and get down to the essence of them - maybe we're all more similar than different after all.

[Lesley Silvester]

It's the not stunning that I object to as well and I have decided that I'm not going to buy any more meat from supermarkets unless and until there is adequate labeling so that I don't inadvertently eat an animal that has been cruelly slaughtered. Ideally, I would like to see the slaughter of animals while still conscious banned totally though.


I do agree, Jaykay, that we go too far in the 'not offending people' line. Yes, we need tolerance but not at the cost of humane treatment. Did anyone see the post going round Facebook that Subway have stopped selling ham and pork so they don't offend Muslims. I hope it's not true because, if it is, that just offends non-Muslims who might want a bacon roll. It does get ridiculous.

[midtown]

Now up to almost 34,000 signatures.

[SallyintNorth]

I do agree, Jaykay, that we go too far in the 'not offending people' line.

It's being British I'm afraid - as the following shows http://www.tickld.com/x/30-problems-only-british-people-will-understand

[Q]

It's being British I'm afraid - as the following shows http://www.tickld.com/x/30-problems-only-british-people-will-understand

I had to laugh at this especially the 'It's being British I'm afraid'  that should be number 31.

[Womble]

There was a fascinating debate on this yesterday on Radio4. They had a chap on from the Jewish slaughter association, saying that "If you insist on labelling food as being killed by the Halal or Jewish method, you must also label it to say whether it was gassed or clubbed (he was being deliberately emotive by referring to captive bolt guns as a 'clubbing' method).
 
The response was "There's no evidence our customers want to see that", or in other words "our customers don't want to think of meat as having ever been alive, so writing 'gassed' on the packet really isn't going to help our sales figures"  .
 
Somebody I know told me they couldn't think of anything more barbaric than raising your own chickens for meat. "Why can't you buy it from Sainsbury's like everybody else?" 

[midtown]

Somebody I know told me they couldn't think of anything more barbaric than raising your own chickens for meat. "Why can't you buy it from Sainsbury's like everybody else?" 

In my mind, that demonstrates a classical case of ignorance! In a similar fashion to those who believe their supermarket purchased litre of homogenised milk is a healthier option to a litre of full cream milk direct from the producer.

I can accept pasteurization of milk, but the fact that homogenisation was introduced by the back door with no benefits other than shelf life is increased, is deplorable.