Bans on ritual slaughter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bans on ritual slaughter have been proposed or enacted in a number of European countries, from the early 1900s onward, resulting in the prohibition or limiting of traditional shechita (Jewish) and dhabiĥa (Islamic) religious customs.

Contents 1 Ritual slaughter practice 2 Trends 3 Historic bans 3.1 Nazi Germany 4 Active bans 4.1 United States 5 Proposed bans 5.1 United Kingdom 5.1.1 Proposals from animal welfare groups 5.1.2 Consistent support of bans from anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic groups 6 See also 7 References

[edit] Ritual slaughter practice

Jewish and Muslim religious customs require that animals be slaughtered by a single cut to the throat instead of the industry standard method that involves stunning prior to slaughter using a bolt to the head.^[1]

Temple Grandin, a leading designer of animal handling systems, wrote, on visiting a Kosher slaughterhouse, "I will never forget having nightmares after visiting the now defunct Spencer Foods plant in Spencer, Iowa fifteen years ago. Employees wearing football helmets attached a nose tong to the nose of a writhing beast suspended by a chain wrapped around one back leg. Each terrified animal was forced with an electric prod to run into a small stall which had a slick floor on a forty-five degree angle. This caused the animal to slip and fall so that workers could attach the chain to its rear leg [in order to raise it into the air]. As I watched this nightmare, I thought, 'This should not be happening in a civilized society.' In my diary I wrote, 'If hell exists, I am in it.' I vowed that I would replace the plant from hell with a kinder and gentler system." ^[2]

[edit] Trends

The Initial ban on kosher slaughter in modern Europe originated in the late 19th century in 1897 in Switzerland. Later bans were enacted in Bavaria in 1930, and in Norway and Nazi Germany in the mid-1930s. Some claim that these early bans on kosher slaughter stem from anti-Semitism.^{[citation needed]}

Debate on the issue has shifted over time such that modern debate focuses primarily on balancing concerns for animal welfare with concerns over limiting freedom of religion.^[3] Additionally, proponents of ritual slaughter argue that their practice is humane and that objections are based on misconceptions.^[3]

Even so, the issue is still complicated by anti-Semitism. Recent proposals originating from animal welfare advocates to ban or maintain existing bans on ritual slaughter, since the measures can be viewed as targeting Jewish or Muslim minorities, have garnered noticeable support from people with anti-Jewish agendas.^[4] Additionally, Spain, in its recent enactment of a ban, has drawn criticism and accusations of veiled anti-Semitism for focusing on religious ritual slaughter for alleged animal welfare concerns in the apparent systematic absence of concern for other similar animal welfare issues.^[4] Lastly, recent debate in Switzerland has been contentious, in part, because of comparisons by a prominent activist between kosher slaughter and the methods used by Nazis in concentration camps.^[3]

[edit] Historic bans

[edit] Nazi Germany

The former chief rabbi of Norway, Michael Melchior, relates that "one of the first things Nazi Germany forbade was kosher slaughter."^[5]

"One of Hitler’s first moves to institutionalize anti -Semitism was to ban all kosher food and anyone caught practicing ritual slaughter was sent straight to a death camp."^[3]

"Significantly, the infamous Nazi "documentary" film Der ewige Jude (The Eternal Jew), designed to sow hatred for Jews, contained a gruesome scene that utterly distorted the way in which animals are killed in accordance with Jewish law, depicting the practice as a barbarous custom in which Jews rejoice at the suffering of animals."^[6]

[edit] Active bans

Within Europe, the legal situation of ritual slaughter differs from country to country :

• Some countries allow ritual slaughter : France^[7][8], Germany^[8], United Kingdom^[7][8], Belgium^[7][8], Italy^[8], Ireland^[7][8], Portugal^[7][8].

• In some countries, animals need to be stunned right after the sacrificing cut : Denmark^[7], Finland^[7], the Lower Austria province^[9].

• Some countries impose stunning before slaughter with no exception : Sweden ^{[7][8][10][11]}, Norway^[8][10], Iceland^[8][10], Switzerland^[8][10][12], six of the eight provinces of Austria^[8][10].

• in the Netherlands, halal slaughter includes some pre-mortem stunning ^[13].

• Spain allows ritual slaughter for sheep and goats but not for cattle^[8].

• the situation in Greece is disputed : it bans ritual slaughter according to a report from the EU commission^[14], but an official Italian report says the opposite^[7].

[edit] United States

Since 1958, the United States has prohibited shackling and hoisting of cattle without stunning them first. However, an exemption for kosher slaughter was written into the Humane Slaughter Act, because at the time, humane methods for commercial-scale kosher slaughter had not been developed.

Temple Grandin, who is both an animal welfare activist and the leading American designer of commercial slaughterhouses, has outlined techniques for humane ritual slaughter ^[15]. She considers shackling and hoisting of animals for slaughter to be inhumane, and has developed alternative approaches usable in production plants. Grandin has coordinated this with the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Conservative movement in the United States, and in 2000, the Committee voted to accept her approach, ruling that "Now that kosher, humane slaughter using upright pens is both possible and widespread, we find shackling and hoisting to be a violation of Jewish laws forbidding cruelty to animals and requiring that we avoid unnecessary dangers to human life. As the CJLS, then, we rule that shackling and hoisting should be stopped." ^[16]

In an investigation by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, undercover video was obtained of Kosher slaughtering practices at a major Kosher slaughterhouse run by Agriprocessors in Postville, Iowa.^[17] The methods used there involved clamping the animals into a box which is then inverted for slaughter, followed by partial dismemberment of the animal before it was dead. Those methods have been condemned as unnecessarily cruel by PETA and others, including Grandin and the the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, but are endorsed by the Orthodox Union^[18], which supervises the slaughterhouse. An investigation by the USDA resulted in some minor operational changes. A lawsuit under Iowa law is pending. Grandin's comment was "I thought it was the most disgusting thing I'd ever seen. I couldn't believe it. I've been in at least 30 other kosher slaughter plants, and I had never ever seen that kind of procedure done before. ... I've seen kosher slaughter really done right, so the problem here is not kosher slaughter. The problem here is a plant that is doing everything wrong they can do wrong". ^[19]

[edit] Proposed bans

[edit] United Kingdom

The government of the United Kingdom has never introduced or passed any ban on ritual slaughter.

[edit] Proposals from animal welfare groups

Note: this section is duplicated from the similar "Modern Debates" subsection -- this is an open problem, see talk page

Since the mid-1980s, proposals have repeatedly surfaced from the animal welfare advocacy groups based on animal cruelty concerns.

Most recently, the debate was reignited by the findings of a 2003 report by the UK government funded Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC). FAWC, which provides advice to the UK government on livestock animal welfare issues, says that the methods employed in Jewish and Islamic ritual slaughter resulted in "severe suffering to animals" and recommended an end to the current exemptions in British law that permit religious slaughter.^[1]

FACW concerned was based on their finding that cattle require up to two minutes to bleed to death when ritual slaughter is employed. Dr Judy MacArthur Clark, chairwomen of FACW, explained it to the BBC: "This is a major incision into the animal and to say that it doesn't suffer is quite ridiculous."^[1]

Compassion in World Farming, a European animal welfare organization, voiced support for FAWC's recommendation: "We believe that the law must be changed to require all animals to be stunned before slaughter."^[1]

Peter Jinman, the president of the British Veterinary Association said on BBC Radio 4's Today programme that veterinarians respected people's religious beliefs but also urged for respecting animals. He continued "We're looking at what is acceptable in the moral and ethical society we live in."^[1]

Roy Saich, a spokesman for the Humanists movement, is quoted as saying:

"There is no imperative for Muslims or Judaists to eat meat produced in this manner [...] There is no reason why they should not simply abstain from eating meat altogether if they do not wish to eat the same meat as the rest of us."^[1]

"But for the most part, British Jews believe their government when it stresses that this ban has been proposed with the sole intention of minimizing animal distress. But that doesn’t mean they agree with it."^[20]

[edit] Consistent support of bans from anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic groups

The far-right British National Front (NF) party, via offering support to the animal welfare groups in their opposition to the ritual slaughter of animals, was able to target Jews and Muslims.^[21] An official NF publication at the time announced:

"All the Jews have to do is stop this barbaric and torturous murder of defenceless animals. When they cease the slaughter the NF will cease its campaign. Until then the NF campaign for animal welfare will continue."^[21]

Similar support was offered to animal welfare groups in the mid-1990s by the successor to the National Front, the British National Party (BNP). A report on anti-Semitism in the United Kingdom from the Israel-based Stephen Roth Institute detailed the familiar tactics of the BNP:

"On the far right [...] the move by some activists into so-called animal rights and farmers' campaigns against central government, has led to a small but growing movement against shechita (Jewish ritual slaughter). In March 1998 [...] copies of a new BNP journal, British Countryman, were distributed. This contained an article entitled 'Stop the Real Cruelty,' which stated: 'Hundreds of thousands of animals die in terror and agony by having their throats slashed open without humane stunning. Halal and kosher ritual slaughter of fully conscious animals is a barbaric affront to the British tradition of livestock [...] Ritual slaughter is a deliberate torture!'" ^[22]

Searchlight, an anti-fascist magazine, wrote in February 2003, describing that the BNP again renewed its opposition to Jewish and Islamic ritual slaughter in the wake of the September 11 2001 attacks. Searchlight gave this description of the party: "Today's BNP is as Islamophobic as it is antisemitic." ^[23]

[edit] See also

• Shechita
• Dhabiĥa
• Anti-semitism
• Islamophobia
• Animal sacrifice
• Animal welfare

[edit] References

Part of a series on the Islamic Jurisprudence – a discipline of Islamic studies

Fields

economical political marital criminal etiquettical theological hygienical Islamic cleanliness Ehram Wudu Ghusl Tayammum Miswak Najis Sexual hygiene Dietary laws Vegetarianism Dhabiĥa – slaughter Bans Alcohol Pork Comparison to Kashrut Toilet etiquette military This box: view • talk • edit