A Muslim method of slaughtering animals.
If you're living in the UK, chances are you are served this meat in pubs and restaurants. Thoughts?

WARNING: graphic video

I think carbon dioxide asphyxiation is the best way, since I've had the 'pleasure' to experience it myself. You only feel uncomfortable for a very short time, after which your brain shuts down. No actual pain.

Found this 1978 research, which seems to suggest halal method is more humane than the bolt to the head:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18968848/C...ic-Examination

Oh great, another Randroid on the forum. Or are you Galt?


Only in your own little world.
Humans aren't that exceptional. We perceive more nuances than most animals due to our intelligence, but our choices are just as predetermined (which is what matters)


Yeah, like this crow with a brain the size of a walnut:


Reason is not an "on or off" property, and comes in degrees. Some agents have more reasoning power than others. Unlike a bacteria, a horse has many attributes (brain power and nervous system among them) which may warrant a consideration (and do in most people).

All complex social animals have codes of ethics (as in: behavior patterns which are enforced by the collective). Wolf packs, bonobo groups, dolphins, etc. Even some insects.


Rights, like codes of ethics, are constructs of the mind. What "rights" you have depends on who you're asking. Torture and murder a stray dog and see whether people think you violated someone's rights. All animals (including us) are machines who have no libertarian freedom, so using volition as an argument is silly.

So far the evidence I gathered (from that one research paper) suggests cutting the neck is less painful, although it sure as hell doesn't look likeit. However, the question remains: should religious rules overrule those of state?
As I understand it, slaughter law in GB requires the animal be stunned beforehand.

Does it matter to you whether you die via being boiled alive or getting a shotgun blast in the head?
Far bigger difference than OP, granted, but it shows that it does matter to someone.

There's haram food and halal food.
To make something halal, the animal must be cut in a certain way so that the animal wouldn't feel too much pain. The person cutting the animal must also recite a special prayer, which supposedly, guides the animal to heaven.

Eating haram food is a sin for muslims.
Haram= Anything to do with pigs, gelatin, and any meat that isn't halal.

You shouldn't advance arguments against slavery. You should be more sensitive to many thousand year old rituals and beliefs. Instead you should sit on your ass quietly and god forbid you try to effect your environment.

The difference being, of course, is that "wrongness" of libertarian free will isn't contingent on people's opinions or beliefs - but is an empirical, observable fact.


Asphyxiation via carbon dioxide (and perhaps certain other gases) is painless. Not enjoyable, mind you, but not painful.
There are many ways to kill something painlessly, but many of them aren't viable to use in mass slaughterhouses.

Apparently it is negotiable, as yours truly demonstrates.
I don't owe Charles Manson any respect. Respect isn't something one is unconditionally entitled to - not even an ounce of it. It's something you can gain or lose completely.


Yes, there is.


1. It's an improvement.
2. The discomfort isn't really extreme. I'll wager that laying in a bed full of cockroaches is more uncomfortable that passing out from lack of oxygen.

Aight. I think I got the gist of everyone here, and now the thread is going in a loop.
If anyone has anything worthwhile to add, pm me or GD mods to reopen it.