Does anyone have a clue what this guy is trying to communicate? I agree with the previous suggestion that he be banned on the grounds that it's impossible to understand WTF he's saying.
Should we ban the Kosher/Halal method of killing unstunned animals?
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
He's saying Jews are Good.
Everyone who agrees with Jews is Good insofar as they agree with Jews.
Anyone who disagrees with Jews is antisemitic, and wrong.
Anyone who questions IamJoseph is a Jew hater and agrees with Hitler.
Simple really.
@Nasor.
Please don't encourage the Mods to ban people.
Everyone who agrees with Jews is Good insofar as they agree with Jews.
Anyone who disagrees with Jews is antisemitic, and wrong.
Anyone who questions IamJoseph is a Jew hater and agrees with Hitler.
Simple really.
@Nasor.
Please don't encourage the Mods to ban people.
Which kind of meat tastes best?
Doesn't Kosher meat have to be spiced because it tastes bland?
What happens to non-Halal people after they die?
Are they roasted in a hell full of fiery cows shitting sulphurous cowpats?
I do like a good ironic punishment.
Doesn't Kosher meat have to be spiced because it tastes bland?
What happens to non-Halal people after they die?
Are they roasted in a hell full of fiery cows shitting sulphurous cowpats?
I do like a good ironic punishment.
Last edited:
I was trying to decrypt the "we don't care people" part.
Why not? There's nothing wrong with having minimum standards.
So let me get this straight... These methods are in use from thousands of years ago. That is when they were 'prescribed'- for the lack of better words... Was stunning available at the time- who knows God might have said stun them first if it was available.
This is again pinning the practice as brutal on God by first not acknowledging stunning was not part of the picture when it was prescribed.
Now if stunning didn't exist- which was the most 'humane' way? That is what you need to ask if your going to make statements like 'God doesn't care'.
Keep things in perspective please.
Peace be unto you
Once you go haraam, you never go back.
Question, theist-to-theist: God couldn't have made stunning available?
Oh, I understand: not part of the historical narrative, etc etc. If He'd given us stunning, we might have hand phazers by this point. But while we're keeping things in perspective, let's not make excuses for God. Maybe his hands were tied, this fickle being, eh?
In any event - we have stunning now. So there's really no excuse to continue the practice any further. As you say: God just didn't have stunning available at the time. He must have known we'd invent it sooner or later; thank Him we have it now. Clearly He must want us to use it.
Question, theist-to-theist: God couldn't have made stunning available?
Oh, I understand: not part of the historical narrative, etc etc. If He'd given us stunning, we might have hand phazers by this point. But while we're keeping things in perspective, let's not make excuses for God. Maybe his hands were tied, this fickle being, eh?
In any event - we have stunning now. So there's really no excuse to continue the practice any further. As you say: God just didn't have stunning available at the time. He must have known we'd invent it sooner or later; thank Him we have it now. Clearly He must want us to use it.
You are wrong.
Do you have the faintest idea what a stun gun is? Well, there are 2 kinds. One kind is a sort of cylinder with a metal rod about 4" long in one end. A brass cap full of gun powder shoots the 4" rod into the cow's brain. The other kind is pneumatic and hangs above the knocking box on a counter-weight. It to shoots a 4" rod into the cow's brain but it also injects compressed air through the rod. Often the 2nd kind literally blows the cow's brains out. Usually the word 'stun' makes you think of something you could recover from. In this case it is a synonym for 'dead'.
Although you're a 'theist' you are pretty much an atheist. You should just admit it and change your 'religion'. Or maybe you're having an identity crisis.
Anyways, yes God could have made it 'available'- then again God could have made everything available- and then the Humans would be left nothing to achieve.? Then there wouldn't be a need for inventing anything as everything would already have been made available?
This ain't paradise- humans gotta utilize what is given to achieve what they want to achieve. This is the 'natural process' in which we are born into.
Peace be unto you
I watched this UK show called "Kill it, Cook it, and Eat It", where they slaughter various animals in front of a live studio audience, and then cook it up right there in an attached kitchen. They used an electrical device to shock them (large animals like cows, pigs, and sheep) and then cut their throats, but they claim the electricity killed them right away.
Unless, you know, you do. You really think that drawing a piece of metal through the neck tissues of a large, live animal is some kind of foolproof, endlessly-replicatable process?
There's a lot of stilted comparisons being thrown around in this thread, in particular an insistence on conflating the best halal slaughter practices with the whole of them. And while I have no problem with pointing out the way it's supposed to work (no shortage of misconceptions there), it is still dishonest to pretend that there are not a substantial number of cases of halal slaughter that are brutal and inflict needless pain and suffering on animals. It's not like halal slaughters are only carried out by highly-trained specialists to exacting standards. Plenty of it is done by unskilled laymen with less-than-razor-sharp instruments.
What would we be studying? The ideal case, when everything goes the way it's supposed to? What actually ends up happening in large-scale commercial slaughterhouses? The entirety of uses of the slaughter method, including amateurs?
Although you're a 'moderate' you're pretty much not.
So, why didn't He?
See, this is the thing, isn't it? This religious conservatism. If He didn't make it available then, we should stick to the old way? And why? This is the central point of the argument. You can't argue it was all that God let us know back in the day as an excuse for why we should keep doing it. If we're meant to achieve something, then why don't we achieve it rather than living with one foot in the past?
quadraphonics said:
Oh come on. It always works on Dexter.
I think what I was trying to say was that to me you're actually not a theist even if you claim to be Christian. Your mind is atheist, and I feel you should just fully 'turn atheist' because that is what you are.
As far as I know a meeting occurred in Jeddah, where Muslim World League and WHO met. And it was decided that stunning before cutting the throat would be Islamic. So I don't see a problem in that.
But the objection that many bring is this: the stunning or some type of blow could infact be enough to kill an animal or be a cause of death in itself. If the animal dies by stunning rather than slaughtering- then that would be 'dead meat' which is unlawful Islamically.
So as long as the animal doesn't die because of the stunning then it is considered fine.. Now some may be totally against it- but I would like to hear their reasons for it.
Stunning + islamic cut = islamic is what the meeting concluded- which should shut up most people (except vegans).
Peace be unto you
?I thought he was all about killing his victims by stabbing them in the heart?
But you raise an interesting idea. Slaughter animals should be injected with sedatives, restrained, and then confronted with photographs of all of the lives they took (pictures of fields of grass and corn, I guess? Plus maybe whatever creatures were displaced for their pasture/feed lot/etc.) before being stabbed to death, dismembered, packed into neat plastic-wrapped packages, loaded onto a boat, and... I guess we shouldn't dump them in the ocean since that would kind of defeat the point. Dump them into a metaphorical ocean of hungry mouths? Plus we'd all get a wicked buzz from the residual narcotics left in the bloodstream. And we could compensate for the added costs by making convicted serial killers do the work, since they have relevant experience and interest.
Not a bad idea, how about growing meat with no central nervous system at all?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat
Nah, they'd be unlikely to survive long enough to be worth eating. There's a reason that animals have the capacity to feel pain, and it isn't that God wanted them to experience suffering. It's that pain is an important signal for avoiding injury and death.
It's not ready for prime-time yet. Give it a few years.
Perhaps that is why God gave it to them :shrug:
So activists are waiting for it while encouraging inhumane activities like stunning! Hypocrites.
Let me get this straight, for 1000s of years humans clubbed one another over the head with a rock to settle disputes, so, let's keep doing that?!? :bugeye:So let me get this straight... These methods are in use from thousands of years ago. That is when they were 'prescribed'- for the lack of better words... Was stunning available at the time- who knows God might have said stun them first if it was available.
This is again pinning the practice as brutal on God by first not acknowledging stunning was not part of the picture when it was prescribed.
Now if stunning didn't exist- which was the most 'humane' way? That is what you need to ask if your going to make statements like 'God doesn't care'.
Keep things in perspective please.
Peace be unto you
Oh, let's put this in our magical religious book so that while the rest of the world modernizes, we can remain mired in Bronze Age blood rituals safe in the knowledge our Bronze Age Gods won't get pissy with us and hold back the rains.... :bugeye:
Yeah, that explains a lot.
I wonder what were the objectives of the literary Creators of Mosses and Mohammad? To retain tradition or break with it? How juxtaposed your way of thinking must have seemed to them... all runny runny back to the Pharaoh willy nilly and all - wouldn't want the Pharaoh or His God's to curse you 786.
--
--
That aside, No, my point was if a God existed, it certainly wouldn't have need to create a reality were things murder other things in order to survive. Then instill a murderous survival instinct into said creation. And, to top it off, make sure animals can perceive the terror and pain along the way. Animals (including humans) could exist without any need whatsoever of food of any kind. See, that's the thing about being ALL POWERFUL you can literally create any type of reality you want. One without electrons for example.
As that could have been the case, and isn't, we can surmise that if a God or Gods existed, It/They certainly have no qualms about pain, murder and death of their creations. As a matter of fact, they MADE it that way, so they WANT it to be that way.
--
--
Of course I don't believe in Gods (or other fairy creatures) so it was more a point for those that do. If one were to stop and think about it, of course society from the Greeks and Roman's to the Chinese and Inca used to slit animals throats as part of animal slaughter (for food) and animal slaughter (for God sacrifice). People were superstitious and didn't understand much of the world around them, they figured Gods liked to have animal scarifies. Why? I'm not quite sure, but of course blood always played a role and of course it was important how the animals were murdered. Probably they thought by watching the animal die they could glimpse something of the next world. It's really hard to say, as it's all made up bullshit anyway. And killing animals in a away that satisfies the Gods still is bullshit.
With the except for maybe some Indian Buddhists and a few ascetics/philosophers here and there (Pythagoras comes to mind) everyone was killing and bleeding out animals (including humans) for their Gods.
As fas I know, only Jews and Muslims still kill animals in a proscribed ritualistic need to satisfy their God. How positively Bronze Age of them. But, maybe I'm wrong? Anyone else know of a people who kill animals in quasi-religious ceremonies? I don't think the Chinese or Japanese do. We don't in the USA. Europeans? Nope. Huh? Maybe there's a stone age group or blood cult somewhere? You'd be hard pressed to find it.
Meanwhile, over here on the entire rest of the planet, again, from Greeks and Roman's to the Chinese, people appear to be moving past the need to murder animals in a manner proscribed by their Gods.
Interestingly, Muslims and Jews CAN perform their blood rituals following a stun - and be more humane doing so. I suppose most just need to be told so by their religious leader. Wouldn't want to do any individual thinking huh 786? Might piss of the Pharaoh. Again, it explains a lot. Those of us in favor of a stun simply need to convince the Ayatollah, then He will tell 786 what to think and do, done and done.
You have a problem really trying to say shit and nothing else?
I never said to continue doing things from the past. What I said was that you saying that 'god doesn't care' is a gross taking things out of historical context. And is a conclusion that can only be made by people like you whose every argument is flawed.
Peace be unto you