« Socialist bedfellows | Main | The Pigs have landed.. »

When animal welfare comes second...


Animal Welfare Minister Ben Bradshaw said that the FAWC recommendation that the Government should ban religious slaughter without stunning on welfare grounds had understandably been deeply contentious for the Jewish and Muslim communities across the UK, to whom this is a matter of fundamental concern.
Mr Bradshaw said: "We are grateful to FAWC for their work, seeking to improve the welfare of farm animals - a goal we share. We also accept that there are deeply held beliefs on both sides of aspects of this argument. We will not ban the production of halal or kosher meat.

The full response is here

Recommendation 61 (Para 201): Council considers that slaughter without pre-stunning is unacceptable and that the Government should repeal the current exemption.

Response: Do not accept. The Government accepts the reportís conclusion that, on balance, animals (especially cattle) slaughtered without pre-stunning are likely to experience very significant pain and distress. We also recognise that certain religious groups in the UK are constrained from eating meat from animals that are stunned at the time of slaughter. If the UK were to ban the slaughter of animals without prior stunning, it will mean that these groups will need to import meat from other countries. There will thus be no improvement in total animal welfare. Furthermore, the Government believes that a ban on religious slaughter would not be consistent with the provision of the Human Rights Act 1998 which implements the European Convention on Human Rights.

So how does the case of Fox Hunting differ from that?


Fox hunters don't vote labour?


I've been trying to access the Countryside Alliance site directly, and through various sites including yours, but have found for over a week now that it "Cannot find server". Are they having a problem with their site at the moment do you know?

http://www.countryside-alliance.com/ seems to work this morning...

James is on the right track. It's called realpolitik.

However, contradictory policies that remain inconsistent with everyone's principles will ensure that this remains an issue that won't go away. I expect religious slaughter to become a mainstream topic in 10 to 15 years and to be yawning once again at my opponents over use of the Ďfascistí and ĎNazií insults.

How about 'Maoist' or 'Stalinist'...? "Realpolitik" is, according to http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/realpolitik
"foreign politics based on practical concerns rather than theory or ethics." So what supposed ethics is involved?

Well, bite my throat and drink my blood! Dang! You can't have it both ways. Can you?

Somehow I thought that some people think that it's icky and nasty to kill yer own food, so you have a Rabbi do it.

Some people think that's not the kind of serious decision with moral consequences that you shove off to someone else so you do it yerself.

Some people are such scaredy-cats they're afraid to kill plants, and call themselves Vegans.

Um, I thought that was one of the reasons we say Grace before meals; y'know, asking forgiveness for the death of our food?

We are animals, not vegetables. We can not live on minerals and sunlight.

To live, we must eat things which were alive, themselves.

Realpolitik. Oxford Concise gives only 'politics based on realities and material needs, rather than morals and ideals'. Although Dictionary.com also gives 'A usually expansionist national policy having as its sole principle advancement of the national interest.'

I obviously used the former. You shouldn't be so shocked that our politicians take practicality into account.

Justthisguy misses the point. Halal and kosher don't take the ickyness away (few people slaughter their own meat), they ensure the animal experiences greater suffering than is necessary.

Lets try again, it was Bismarck who coined the term "realpolitik", re: his efforts to unifiy Germany under Prussia in 1871.
Later Germany tried to "unify" the rest of Europe, a couple times. It didn't work although the French started planting shade-trees on their highways.

Practicality is politiks aimed at the retainment of advantage or towards increasing leverage. Towards winning. Praktikality is all about winning, no matter how; feigning conzessions to vhatever group kan best leverage your position against your opponent, or caving-in to oppozing prezzures in order to retain vhatever skraps of political influence remain.

Post a comment