Facing fury...Denmark bans Halal and Kosher meat as 'animal rights come before religion'

DENMARK has provoked the fury of Muslim and Jewish groups by banning Halal and Kosher slaughter on animal rights grounds.The new law, which came into force yesterday, has been criticised by religious groups. But minister for agriculture and food Dan Jørgensen said that "animal rights come before religion".

Condemning the Danish change in the law, Israel’s deputy minister of religious services Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan said: "European anti-Semitism is showing its true colours across Europe, and is even intensifying in the government institutions."

Al Jazeera quoted the monitoring group Danish Halal, which launched a petition against the ban, as saying it was "a clear interference in religious freedom limiting the rights of Muslims and Jews to practice their religion in Denmark".


http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/460440/Denmark-faces-religious-fury-for-banning-Halal-and-Kosher-meat-on-animal-rights-grounds

Interesting.

and who will be brave enough to follow suit until this vile situation is outlawed all over Europe, then we can turn our attention to ensuring slaughter houses are clean and well run and everyone working there is compassionate, educated in animal welfare and technically proficient not to mention banning live exports and making sentencing for breaches of animal welfare, hurt enough to be avoided.

Let me guess.

Not Britain!

Well at least Jews and Muslims can work together on this. They have little else in common. Some of the methods of slaughter do appear barbaric so I think on balance I'm with the Danish Government on this. Danish bacon on my sandwiches Mrs Phoenix.

 

DENMARK'S modern day neo-nazi's are the last people that have any right to cite "animal rights", in any contexts...

THOSE filthy slime-sucking Giraffe murderers should be banned from using terms such as "animal rights" and "animal cruelty" anywhere within their language..

AND those immoral and ethical zeroes should be prevented forthwith from operating any and all types of zoos or animal parks..    

I support this Danish Initiative  :::grouch:: 

Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan is a Racist

Good on them, hope they have stopped live animal exports to brutal overseas slaughter houses too!

veya_victaous wrote:I support this Danish Initiative  :::grouch:: 

Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan is a Racist

There is something strangely compelling about Skynet. As long as you have the deactivate codes.

@phoenix

The Lesson from Terminator is not "Don't build Skynet" it is "Don't give Computers Zero Sum Statements"...

Don’t ask for No Crime, No Pain, No suffering. Ask it to reduce those things, but the only way to achieve the Zero goal is to not have people to to Suffer and Feel pain.
Even when programing a computer today if you give it a zero sum it will either do nothing or be quite an extreme/absolute solution. Just Part of Maths and the way formulas react to magic number Zero (partly because you cannot divide by it).

Also the Terminators themselves would not have to be part of skynet, Really What Skynet Proposes is replacing Opinions with hard numbers, A system capable of correlating the vast amount of data need to accurately make decisions. Replace the Rubber Stamps of Bureaucracy with High Speed Statistical analysis.

Good evening Folks.

Well all Denmark has to do now is ban illegals & left wingers & it'll be the perfect country to live in.

Shady wrote:Good evening Folks.

Well all Denmark has to do now is ban illegals & left wingers & it'll be the perfect country to live in.

It does seem to me that the rest of Europe really are quite against foreigners moving to their countries.

Shady wrote:Good evening Folks.

Well all Denmark has to do now is ban illegals & left wingers & it'll be the perfect country to live in.

I was looking at that list of countries and the proportions of immigrants. Denmark comes very low on the list. Wonder why?

Tess. wrote:DENMARK has provoked the fury of Muslim and Jewish groups by banning Halal and Kosher slaughter on animal rights grounds.The new law, which came into force yesterday, has been criticised by religious groups.  But minister for agriculture and food Dan Jørgensen said that "animal rights come before religion".

Condemning the Danish change in the law, Israel’s deputy minister of religious services Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan said: "European anti-Semitism is showing its true colours across Europe, and is even intensifying in the government institutions."

Al Jazeera quoted the monitoring group Danish Halal, which launched a petition against the ban, as saying it was "a clear interference in religious freedom limiting the rights of Muslims and Jews to practice their religion in Denmark".


http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/460440/Denmark-faces-religious-fury-for-banning-Halal-and-Kosher-meat-on-animal-rights-grounds

if they don't like it they can either starve or move elsewhere.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Shady wrote:Good evening Folks.

Well all Denmark has to do now is ban illegals & left wingers & it'll be the perfect country to live in.

It does seem to me that the rest of Europe really are quite against foreigners moving to their countries.

I've always said that the tide would eventually turn against all this free movement,benefit scroungers & muslim extremism......And I was right.

This left wing madness of allowing everything that's bad to happen was a passing fad & common sense will prevail.

The likes of Blair & his acolytes are on the way out.

Tess. wrote:

Shady wrote:Good evening Folks.

Well all Denmark has to do now is ban illegals & left wingers & it'll be the perfect country to live in.

I was looking at that list of countries and the proportions of immigrants.  Denmark comes very low on the list.  Wonder why?

Hi Tess.Do you mean that the proportion of immigrants in Denmark is low?

its an excellent and correct move to make.

All of the world is becoming one big multiculture, and all the regressive forces of the world can't stop it.

Shady wrote:

Tess. wrote:
I was looking at that list of countries and the proportions of immigrants.  Denmark comes very low on the list.  Wonder why?

Hi Tess.Do you mean that the proportion of immigrants in Denmark is low?

Yep. Immigrants to the UK is 566,000 - to Denmark is 52,800.

hope this doesn't affect Danish Bacon.

Ben_Reilly wrote:All of the world is becoming one big multiculture, and all the regressive forces of the world can't stop it.

if we are to embrace everyone rights, why are we being forced in to one huge culture, should our own cultures be embraced and tolerated.. :D 

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:All of the world is becoming one big multiculture, and all the regressive forces of the world can't stop it.

if we are to embrace everyone rights, why are we being forced in to one huge culture, should our own cultures be embraced and tolerated.. :D 

I googled Denmark. 98% of their population is Christian (and Lutheran) - in England Christians are only 59%.

Tess. wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

if we are to embrace everyone rights, why are we being forced in to one huge culture, should our own cultures be embraced and tolerated.. :D 

I googled Denmark.  98% of their population is Christian (and Lutheran) - in England Christians are only 59%.

wow go Denmark... :D  perhaps they are not bending to islamic pressure so easily then.

2) Sweden & 3) Denmark. It might not seem immediately obvious why high numbers of non-believers in a country would make life better for atheists, but the examples of Sweden and Denmark show why this is true. When non-belief or even outright atheism is widespread, atheists can go about their lives free from the fear that their lack of belief will cause people to mistrust, hate, or even discriminate against them. These two countries, in which only 17% and 18%, respectively, of the population consider religion important, have become icons of secularist values to the rest of the world. Phil Zuckerman, a sociologist from Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif., spent a little more than a year talking to citizens to find out why. He discovered that your average Danish or Swedish citizen simply doesn’t think much about religion; in these two cultures, religion has largely been relegated to a ceremonial role. For the typical atheist who likes to have a Christmas tree without the burden of having to believe in the Virgin Birth, the Danish and Swedish attitude towards religion should fit like a cozy sweater.

Ben_Reilly wrote:2) Sweden & 3) Denmark. It might not seem immediately obvious why high numbers of non-believers in a country would make life better for atheists, but the examples of Sweden and Denmark show why this is true. When non-belief or even outright atheism is widespread, atheists can go about their lives free from the fear that their lack of belief will cause people to mistrust, hate, or even discriminate against them. These two countries, in which only 17% and 18%, respectively, of the population consider religion important, have become icons of secularist values to the rest of the world. Phil Zuckerman, a sociologist from Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif., spent a little more than a year talking to citizens to find out why. He discovered that your average Danish or Swedish citizen simply doesn’t think much about religion; in these two cultures, religion has largely been relegated to a ceremonial role. For the typical atheist who likes to have a Christmas tree without the burden of having to believe in the Virgin Birth, the Danish and Swedish attitude towards religion should fit like a cozy sweater.

what utter rubbish as if atheists have ever cared what believers think, you really believe your own BS don't you. you think everyone who believes in God is an idiot so why would you fear them.. :D 

Ben_Reilly wrote:All of the world is becoming one big multiculture, and all the regressive forces of the world can't stop it.

No Ben that's not quite right as the world has been for a long time one big multiculture & Britain has a proud tradition of being multicultural for a long long time.

It's just that we don't particularly like invasion....creeping invasion to be precise.

Puriel wrote:

Tess. wrote:DENMARK has provoked the fury of Muslim and Jewish groups by banning Halal and Kosher slaughter on animal rights grounds.The new law, which came into force yesterday, has been criticised by religious groups.  But minister for agriculture and food Dan Jørgensen said that "animal rights come before religion".

Condemning the Danish change in the law, Israel’s deputy minister of religious services Rabbi Eli Ben Dahan said: "European anti-Semitism is showing its true colours across Europe, and is even intensifying in the government institutions."

Al Jazeera quoted the monitoring group Danish Halal, which launched a petition against the ban, as saying it was "a clear interference in religious freedom limiting the rights of Muslims and Jews to practice their religion in Denmark".


http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/460440/Denmark-faces-religious-fury-for-banning-Halal-and-Kosher-meat-on-animal-rights-grounds

if they don't like it they can either starve or move elsewhere.

Doesn't take a mastermind to work out where they will be heading too.................

us over here in the all embracing lets' all be nice, and we will bend over backwards to accommodate you and your barbarian practices.

'smoke my Bacon'

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:2) Sweden & 3) Denmark. It might not seem immediately obvious why high numbers of non-believers in a country would make life better for atheists, but the examples of Sweden and Denmark show why this is true. When non-belief or even outright atheism is widespread, atheists can go about their lives free from the fear that their lack of belief will cause people to mistrust, hate, or even discriminate against them. These two countries, in which only 17% and 18%, respectively, of the population consider religion important, have become icons of secularist values to the rest of the world. Phil Zuckerman, a sociologist from Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif., spent a little more than a year talking to citizens to find out why. He discovered that your average Danish or Swedish citizen simply doesn’t think much about religion; in these two cultures, religion has largely been relegated to a ceremonial role. For the typical atheist who likes to have a Christmas tree without the burden of having to believe in the Virgin Birth, the Danish and Swedish attitude towards religion should fit like a cozy sweater.

what utter rubbish as if atheists have ever cared what believers think, you really believe your own BS don't you. you think everyone who believes in God is an idiot so why would you fear them.. :D 

Why would I fear them, huh?

On October 18, 2004, Larry Hooper was murdered by his friend Arthur Shelton Why? According to Shelton, a devout Christian and an Eagle Scout, Hooper was an atheist and thus the "devil himself." Shelton seems to have believed that, as a Christian and follower of God, he had an obligation to kill Larry Hooper and remove his evil, atheistic influence from this planet.

http://atheism.about.com/b/2007/01/19/murdered-for-being-an-atheist.htm

heavenly father wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:2) Sweden & 3) Denmark. It might not seem immediately obvious why high numbers of non-believers in a country would make life better for atheists, but the examples of Sweden and Denmark show why this is true. When non-belief or even outright atheism is widespread, atheists can go about their lives free from the fear that their lack of belief will cause people to mistrust, hate, or even discriminate against them. These two countries, in which only 17% and 18%, respectively, of the population consider religion important, have become icons of secularist values to the rest of the world. Phil Zuckerman, a sociologist from Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif., spent a little more than a year talking to citizens to find out why. He discovered that your average Danish or Swedish citizen simply doesn’t think much about religion; in these two cultures, religion has largely been relegated to a ceremonial role. For the typical atheist who likes to have a Christmas tree without the burden of having to believe in the Virgin Birth, the Danish and Swedish attitude towards religion should fit like a cozy sweater.

what utter rubbish as if atheists have ever cared what believers think, you really believe your own BS don't you. you think everyone who believes in God is an idiot so why would you fear them.. :D 

of cause in the past athiests have cared what religitards thought... you used to fucking burn them      

Saw this piece in The Guardian today, and thought it just about covered everything that was ridiculous with Danish stance:

Denmark's ritual slaughter ban says more about human hypocrisy than animal welfare
To complain about the halal or kosher slaughter of battery chickens or factory farmed veal is a truly monstrous absurdity.

"Animal welfare takes precedence over religion" declared Denmark's ministry of agriculture when a ban on ritual slaughter came into effect this week. There were immediate accusations of antisemitism and Islamophobia from Jews and Muslims, even though both communities are still free to import meat killed by their preferred methods, and even though no animals have in fact been slaughtered without pre-stunning in Denmark for the past 10 years.

These disputes may indeed cast some light on our attitudes towards outsider communities – I remember concerns about halal slaughter being expressed in Bradford in 1984 as part of an early row about Muslim integration and lack of integration. But what is really remarkable is the light that they don't cast on animal cruelty for secular reasons.

It seems to me obvious that the slaughter of animals at the end of their lives is of far less ethical importance than the way they are treated beforehand. The cruelties of factory farming extend over an animal's whole lifetime whereas the cruelty of ritual slaughter lasts minutes at most. To complain about the halal slaughter of battery chickens or factory farmed veal is a truly monstrous absurdity.

In a Danish context this is particularly obvious. The pig farming industry there, whose products are devoured by almost everyone in Europe who isn't an observant Jew of Muslim, is a monstrous engine of quotidian suffering, despite the pre-slaughter stunning. The new agriculture minister, Dan Jørgensen, has pointed out that 25,000 piglets a day die in Danish factory farms – they never even make it to the slaughterhouse; that half of the sows have open sores and 95% have their tails docked, a cruel (and under EU regulations, illegal) practice that is needed to stop them chewing and biting one another's tails in their concrete sheds.

This sort of cruelty is justified because it makes money for pig farmers, and saves it for consumers. There is no religious angle involved and few people see it as any serious ethical problem. I personally try to avoid chicken, pork and salmon in cheap food, from green motives and from a distaste for animal suffering but I am aware that this in one of the eccentricities that solvency permits.

There are two further ironies about the Danish case. The first is that the country was last week the focus of international indignation for slaughtering a giraffe, entirely humanely, and then using its corpse first to teach biology and then to feed lions, who must have had a treat. It is impossible to fault any of this behaviour on utilitarian grounds, or even, I think, on humane ones if we are going to have zoos at all. Certainly Marius the unhappy giraffe lived a short life infinitely better and more interesting than any of the six million pigs born and slaughtered in Denmark every year.

The second is that Jørgensen, who has formalised the ban on ritual slaughter (something inherited from his predecessors), is actually a notable enemy of factory farming. In a series of articles and speeches he has announced that Danish factory farming must clean up its act, and that the present situation is unendurable. He at least understands the potential hypocrisy of attacking only the cruelty around an animal's death and not that surrounding its life.

I suspect that there is some real substance behind the Muslim complaints that a ban on halal slaughter is motivated as much by the wish to cause fundamentalists suffering as to spare it to animals. But that tells us much more about human beings than about animal rights.

The first principle of serious ethical reason is surely "It isn't different when we do it" but at the same time it is an axiom of moral sentiment that it's different when other people do it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2014/feb/20/denmark-halal-kosha-slaughter-hypocrisy-animal-welfare

I wouldn't touch Danish pork if I was starving, their methods are truly hellish.

Sassy wrote:Saw this piece in The Guardian today, and thought it just about covered everything that was ridiculous with Danish stance:

Denmark's ritual slaughter ban says more about human hypocrisy than animal welfare
To complain about the halal or kosher slaughter of battery chickens or factory farmed veal is a truly monstrous absurdity.

"Animal welfare takes precedence over religion" declared Denmark's ministry of agriculture when a ban on ritual slaughter came into effect this week. There were immediate accusations of antisemitism and Islamophobia from Jews and Muslims, even though both communities are still free to import meat killed by their preferred methods, and even though no animals have in fact been slaughtered without pre-stunning in Denmark for the past 10 years.

These disputes may indeed cast some light on our attitudes towards outsider communities – I remember concerns about halal slaughter being expressed in Bradford in 1984 as part of an early row about Muslim integration and lack of integration. But what is really remarkable is the light that they don't cast on animal cruelty for secular reasons.

It seems to me obvious that the slaughter of animals at the end of their lives is of far less ethical importance than the way they are treated beforehand. The cruelties of factory farming extend over an animal's whole lifetime whereas the cruelty of ritual slaughter lasts minutes at most. To complain about the halal slaughter of battery chickens or factory farmed veal is a truly monstrous absurdity.

In a Danish context this is particularly obvious. The pig farming industry there, whose products are devoured by almost everyone in Europe who isn't an observant Jew of Muslim, is a monstrous engine of quotidian suffering, despite the pre-slaughter stunning. The new agriculture minister, Dan Jørgensen, has pointed out that 25,000 piglets a day die in Danish factory farms – they never even make it to the slaughterhouse; that half of the sows have open sores and 95% have their tails docked, a cruel (and under EU regulations, illegal) practice that is needed to stop them chewing and biting one another's tails in their concrete sheds.

This sort of cruelty is justified because it makes money for pig farmers, and saves it for consumers. There is no religious angle involved and few people see it as any serious ethical problem. I personally try to avoid chicken, pork and salmon in cheap food, from green motives and from a distaste for animal suffering but I am aware that this in one of the eccentricities that solvency permits.

There are two further ironies about the Danish case. The first is that the country was last week the focus of international indignation for slaughtering a giraffe, entirely humanely, and then using its corpse first to teach biology and then to feed lions, who must have had a treat. It is impossible to fault any of this behaviour on utilitarian grounds, or even, I think, on humane ones if we are going to have zoos at all. Certainly Marius the unhappy giraffe lived a short life infinitely better and more interesting than any of the six million pigs born and slaughtered in Denmark every year.

The second is that Jørgensen, who has formalised the ban on ritual slaughter (something inherited from his predecessors), is actually a notable enemy of factory farming. In a series of articles and speeches he has announced that Danish factory farming must clean up its act, and that the present situation is unendurable. He at least understands the potential hypocrisy of attacking only the cruelty around an animal's death and not that surrounding its life.

I suspect that there is some real substance behind the Muslim complaints that a ban on halal slaughter is motivated as much by the wish to cause fundamentalists suffering as to spare it to animals. But that tells us much more about human beings than about animal rights.

The first principle of serious ethical reason is surely "It isn't different when we do it" but at the same time it is an axiom of moral sentiment that it's different when other people do it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2014/feb/20/denmark-halal-kosha-slaughter-hypocrisy-animal-welfare

I wouldn't touch Danish pork if I was starving, their methods are truly hellish.

Interesting that one minute you scream and shout about badger culling and when the Danes make a stance you go the other way?

If the Guardian says it you do it perhaps?

How you try and make a correlation between the badgers, who are wild animals, who would not have been shot if the government had not put out incorrect details of the amount of tb in cattle, and their very antithesis, animals that are being bred for meat and would die anyway. As stated in the article, all animals in Denmark have been prestunned for 10 years, so what method is used to kill them afterwards is rather a non issue and not something to make a big thing about. As the article points out, it is especially hypocrital when taking into account the dreadful way pigs are kept during their lifetime in Denmark and the way chickens are treated, have you ever seen a film on the slaughter (non halal) of chickens and the conditions they are kept in? The subject is so talked about, it even made its way into an episode of Borgen. Getting your knickers in a twist about something that happens for two minutes after an animal has been stunned when you don't give a damn about the way meat is bred during its lifetime, seems a completely pointless exercise, especially when the country is quite happy with the public slaughtering, butchering and throwing to the lions, of a perfectly healthy giraffe.

I am simply saying that one minute the animal comes first a reasonable position and the next it a religious issue.

Which is it. I was convinced by you passionate statements about badgers. Surely you aren't saying farm animals don't count?

Of course farm animals count, that is why, if they are being bred for meat I want them to not be treated as the pigs and chickens are treated, especially the pigs in Denmark, and I not going to worry about something that happens when they are about to be turned into meat anyway and are already stunned and can't feel anything.

Well done, Denmark. With our laws animals are slaughtered humanely, not having their throats slit as with halal meat/animals.
It is barbaric and cruel and it's about time Britain stood up to non-British cultures and said 'no, not in our country.'