I would love to know what other people think on the issue of religious slaughter and its circumventing of the law...
Is it acceptable that animal should suffer (even more) for religious reasons based on the magic books of a minority?
What is the wider impact of tolerating this kind of nonsense on the religion/law debate?
My view is that the law is the law and supercedes any religion because religion is a choice, in the same way that rape and murder are a choice, If societies start to allow the religions a way out based on their choice to believe, where will it stop? On the same logic, isn't killing infidels ok for muslims as it's in the koran? Or rape and slavery fine if practiced by xtians because there they are pretty much condoned in the bible?
Seems like a slippery slope to me..
It seems extremely complex over there, how does anyone ever know if they are breaking the law?
Sometimes it can be hard to know whether one is breaking the law or not here in the U.S. There are so many different, overlapping and even contradictory rules. Even laymen have to do a little research before taking up a new activity sometimes. Mostly, though, the rules align with common sense--no violence or theft allowed, etc.
I was going to bring up all the different jurisdictions in the US: states, counties, and cities, but you beat me to it. Simply because something is allowed nationally, it doesn't follow it's permissible unless it's constitutionally protected.
Strega has probably nailed the way a non-American would best analogize our setup. We did indeed start out as a federation of states (though the trend over the last two centuries has been towards having the Federal government legislate on more and more things--in Jefferson's day (1801 through 1808) one hardly ever saw an agent of the federal government unless they worked in a seaport and dealt with Customs people, or joined the military).
One big difference is that the language doesn't change (much) when you cross a state line. And of course many of the states were deliberately created out of whole cloth. (No naturally evolving nation-state would end up being "square" like Colorado and Wyoming are.) But they do have their own laws. Fortunately, traffic laws and the like tend to be uniform. People moving from one state to another will be tripped up by differing tax systems and possibly laws having to do with self defense, but not much else...unless they run a business or own more land than a house lot.
The Koran does specifically advocate beheading unbelievers by the way 8.12 and 47.4 so I guess that includes innocent human beings unless you take the Koran view that the fact of being an unbeliever means you aren't innocent
Sorry, Murray, but ISIS is religious. They are religious fundamentalists.
"...It is quick and the animal does not suffer..." Haha now that's funny.
Come over to the house and we will go out to the shed in the back, I'll stick a sharp knife in your throat and you can tell me how much you're NOT SUFFERING.
Okay, so let's stop eating meat so that all the nice animals can die in a hospital with their relatives at their bedside.
Believe me a quick knife to the carotid artery kills the animal's brain in seconds. It is relatively humane to the fate they'd "enjoy" in nature.
A lot of these animal rights people haven't thought it all through.
If you can bear to watch it, wild dogs eating a kudu while it's clearly still alive. Welcome to the alternative to the knife at the throat.
To be clear, I do think animals should be treated well up to the day they are slaughtered.
This is a link to a video showing what goes on outside the slaughterhouse in Ales, France, I'm not sure anyone could watch it and think that there wasn't intense and long-lasting suffering, and no matter how closely I look, I can"t spot the animals being slaughtered facing mecca or being prayed over before being swiftly dispatched!
Dull knifes...somebody should get those boys a sharping stone.