Ritual slaughtering of animals stopped in Poland.

[frogwoman]

Having worked in a slaughterhouse, a normal non religious prep one, I can say that the method of slaughter does not seem that much more humane. It's all horrible blood, shit, death and the smell of freshly opened guts.

never did work out why christians don't have a similar stricture-setup about animal slaughter. Its from the same source religion as islam and so forth. Yet no guidlines as to slaughter. hmm.

Because the whole idea of Christianity when it started i think was to get it so that it was as easy as possible for non-jews to convert to and follow the religion. While it was easier in those days to convert to Judaism than it is now it still laid a whole lot of rules down on you.

 

[co-op]

But you missed fascist, capitalist, nazi, conservative, and anti-gay, in Urban75 ad-hominem bingo, so no Full House for you.

You forgot misogynist.

 

[DotCommunist]

Do I want to point out that deliberately prolonging an animal's period of consciousness, and therefore suffering, during slaughter to appease an invisible, stone age sky god is a revolting practice that is not consistent with what modern thinking considers to be moral?

Sure I do.

Of course, I'm talking about any religion that does it, not jews, and we've established previously (your "wings fell off" refers) that you can't differentiate reliably between being anti-religious and anti-Semitic. So I confidently predict we are on the cusp of yet another urban75 ad-hominem fallacy argument. But by all means knock yourself out (to use an appropriately savage phrase) defending its practitioners.

feel free to point out all those occaisons where you have spoken out against buddhism, shinto and so on.

 

[Falcon]

its perfectly reasonable to question your motives here.

I'm sceptical that the Polish government had the welfare of animals on its mind when it passed this legislation.

Questioning motives is certainly a convenient device for deflecting scrutiny.

 

[co-op]

Also you have issued forth enough garbage about the jews in the past that its perfectly reasonable to question your motives here.

Yep, think there may be a misunderstanding of "ad hominem" on Falcon's part here. To point out that someone arguing against a jewish religious practise has a history of anti-semitic bias is not an ad hominem attack per se.

It would be ad hominem if Falcon were arguing against - eg - the right to buy a council house or some other completely non-jewish related topic.

 

[Falcon]

feel free to point out all those occaisons where you have spoken out against buddhism, shinto and so on.

Feel free to point out all those buddhism, shinto and so on threads in which I might have had the opportunity.

 

[Falcon]

You forgot misogynist.

Lol - I was going to edit the post to add it in - thanks for relieving me of the burden

 

[Falcon]

Yep, think there may be a misunderstanding of "ad hominem" on Falcon's part here. To point out that someone arguing against a jewish religious practise has a history of anti-semitic bias is not an ad hominem attack per se.

It would be ad hominem if Falcon were arguing against - eg - the right to buy a council house or some other completely non-jewish related topic.

No misunderstanding. The statement that I have an anti-semitic bias is, itself, an ad-hominem attack by suggesting that I am disposed to take a particular position.

I have no anti-semitic bias, and therefore am not disposed to take a particular position on Judaism per se.

 

[DotCommunist]

Questioning motives is certainly a convenient device for deflecting scrutiny.

why do you think you can enter this thread tabula rasa Falcon? We know what you've posted, we know what you are. This isn't debate club, its a forum for discussion and you have discussed far to much for anyone to take you at face value. You fool nobody

 

[Falcon]

The Nazis introduced all sorts of animal welfare measures - they banned cooking live lobsters as well iirc

They also were some of the first to prove the harmful effects of smoking

And this augments the Chief Rabbi's speculations in what way?

 

[DotCommunist]

The Nazis introduced all sorts of animal welfare measures - they banned cooking live lobsters as well iirc

They also were some of the first to prove the harmful effects of smoking

dunno where this idea that the nazis weren't good at engineering and science comes from tbh. For the former period of ww2 they had the better arms and equipment, rocketry made great leaps under braun etc

 

[Bajie]

Since joining the EU Polish farmers have had to comply with better animal welfare standards, which where almost non-existent before. It would have been a bigger issue if they did not receive a lot of EU money as subsidies. Even though it is not really clear how well farmers and slaughter houses there are complying with the new regulations.

This new rule seems more geared towards Polish farmers exporting to muslim and jewish markets, rather than for muslims or jews living in Poland, as there are hardly any jews left and very few muslims.

 

[Falcon]

This isn't debate club, its a forum for discussion

Eh?

To be precise. An observation that a finite ecosystem can support only a finite population makes me a malthusian - in your mind. A criticism of some aspects of Judaism makes me anti-semitic - in your mind. A criticism of some aspects of feminism makes me a misogynist - in your mind. A criticism of some aspects of Socialism makes me a Capitalist - in your mind. (Goodness knows how, as a gay man, I got labelled as anti-gay) Etc. etc. etc.

This is neither a debate club, nor a forum for discussion (assuming there is some sort of meaningful distinction that I can't presently detect). It's a hangout for rude intolerant people, an uncivil shouting match, a festival of "liar, liar, pants on fire" and "people who think this, also think that, you think that, so you are this" fallacy, and - therefore - a spectator sport and source of mild entertainment on quiet days.

 

[frogwoman]

And this augments the Chief Rabbi's argument in what way?

I didn't say that it did, I was just saying.

There are quite a few links between the Nazis and the environmental movement in general.

 

[Greebo]

<snip>never did work out why christians don't have a similar stricture-setup about animal slaughter. Its from the same source religion as islam and so forth. Yet no guidelines as to slaughter. hmm.

The early ones did, mainly because at first it was believed that Christ's teachings were only for the Children of Israel and their descendants; a nudge back to the right path, if you will. Paul/Saul was one of the people who had a hand in changing that (at least according to the NT) after his dream about the food. From then on, it gradually changed from a version of new and improved Judaism to a religion in its own right which was open to anyone.

Romans caught out many an early Christian by offering them a piece of blood sausage.

 

[frogwoman]

Questioning motives is certainly a convenient device for deflecting scrutiny.

Scrutiny from what?

Poland has a quite recent history of politicians making anti-semitic statements, and then there is the fact that the "Radio Maria" radio station which is noted for its anti-gay and anti-semitic content was quite close to some of the politicians in the previous administration. That's why I was sceptical that it was only about animal cruelty. I don't know what the rest of their laws on animal protection are like though, so I might be entirely wrong.

 

[frogwoman]

Since joining the EU Polish farmers have had to comply with better animal welfare standards, which where almost non-existent before. It would have been a bigger issue if they did not receive a lot of EU money as subsidies. Even though it is not really clear how well farmers and slaughter houses there are complying with the new regulations.

This new rule seems more geared towards Polish farmers exporting to muslim and jewish markets, rather than for muslims or jews living in Poland, as there are hardly any jews left and very few muslims.

Ah fair enough yeah, I think it talked about this in the independent article that butchers linked to.

 

[DotCommunist]

Eh?

To be precise. An observation that a finite ecosystem can support only a finite population makes me a malthusian. A criticism of some aspects of Judaism makes me anti-semitic. A criticism of some aspects of feminism makes me a misogynist. A criticism of some aspects of Socialism makes me a Capitalist. (Goodness knows how, as a gay man, I got labelled as anti-gay) Etc.

This is neither a debate club, nor a forum for discussion (assuming there is some sort of meaningful distinction that I can't presently detect). It's a festival of "liar, liar, pants on fire" and "people who think this, also think that, you think that, so you are this" fallacy, and a source of mild entertainment on quiet days.

fallacy, ad hominem, reductio etc

you are doing it again. You've been consistently caught out on the jew front as well- properly caught out. This attempt to present yourself as the victim of a bullying culture just won't wash.

Plenty of gay men in the notoriously homophobic tory party btw.

 

[Greebo]

Eh?

This is neither a debate club, nor a forum for discussion.<snip>

This place has a tendancy to reflect back what you give out - play at fancy dress and people will tell you when your costume rips or your mask slips.

If you must use a persona, make it a good one.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

The ritual slaughter is humane. If you hold a lamb down by the neck its body is relaxed and dies very quickly when its throat is sliced. Most abbatoirs are much worse, IMO. Why is stunning more humane, just because it stops the animal being able to move?

ETA: ensuring the animal is relaxed reduces adrenaline in the meat

 

[ViolentPanda]

Pretty convincing reasons why here.

Had a chuckle at the fact that the latest comment post on that article is by the wanker who used to post here as "Old Stoic", the "anarchist" property-developer.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Electrical 'Stunning' is disgusting. It's just to incapacitate rather than kill the animal so the butchering can begin.

To be a bit more specific, it's about facilitating the production-line butchering of large batches of livestock with a minimum of disturbance.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I thought that the party which was into all the political Catholic stuff was the one with those twins in it? And I thought they were no longer in power?

They were just the most overt.

 

[trabuquera]

This is neither a debate club, nor a forum for discussion (assuming there is some sort of meaningful distinction that I can't presently detect). It's a hangout for rude intolerant people, an uncivil shouting match, a festival of "liar, liar, pants on fire" and "people who think this, also think that, you think that, so you are this" fallacy, and - therefore - a spectator sport and source of mild entertainment on quiet days.

Always making friends, eh?

For someone with such a low opinion of the standard of debate here you seem to be spending an awful lot of time stirring it up.

But if you're genuinely as upset about the response to your arguments as you sound, it might be more healthy not to spend such a lot of time & energy in the company of people you find so rebarbative. unless that's your whole objective in posting here at all, hmmmm?

 

[xslavearcx]

Because the whole idea of Christianity when it started i think was to get it so that it was as easy as possible for non-jews to convert to and follow the religion. While it was easier in those days to convert to Judaism than it is now it still laid a whole lot of rules down on you.

exactly. read st pauls letters on jewish dietary laws. there is a lot of interesting arguments reported within the book of acts and pauls letters pointing to a pretty big power struggle between the jewish christians headed by james and the church for the gentiles headed by paul. Paul eventually settles for the jamesian position when he repents and does the nazirite oath but then reneges on it and goes back to teaching that one can eat meat regardless of what idol its sacrificed to but not to be done in the presense of 'those weak in faith' (i.e. xtians for the jewish dietry laws)..

Whats interesting is james recommendation for gentile xtians to follow the less rigerous noachic commandments which are less stringent than the ones expected within the hebrew community. The noachic ones (that is the ones commanded to noah after the ark touches ground) were the second set of commands following the edenic primordial ones as articulated in the book of genesis(vegetarian). Noah was if you like the new progenetor of humanity so this was if you like considered to be the universal ones for humanity to follow... Its interesting because halal ones are pretty much the same as the noachic ones and less stringent than the ones specifically designated for the jewish community....

 

[xslavearcx]

The early ones did, mainly because at first it was believed that Christ's teachings were only for the Children of Israel and their descendants; a nudge back to the right path, if you will. Paul/Saul was one of the people who had a hand in changing that (at least according to the NT) after his dream about the food. From then on, it gradually changed from a version of new and improved Judaism to a religion in its own right which was open to anyone.

Romans caught out many an early Christian by offering them a piece of blood sausage.

shoulda read this post before posting my last one haha

 

[DotCommunist]

wtf was wrong with paul of tarsus the woman hater?

 

[xslavearcx]

wtf was wrong with paul of tarsus the woman hater?

- not to mention having a fair bit of responsibility towards future xtian anti semetic constructios
- pro slavery (he advises xtian slave to go back to his master)
- pro nero and giving good quotations to justify all sorts of political authority "becuase that authority is from god" etc (that quote gets used a lot by luther in his vision of the authority of the prince in contrast to other versions of protestantism kicking about such as Thomas Muntzers version xtian communism)


but now, thanks to badiou and zizek, paul has become the flavour of the month "founder of universalism". Badiou, to be fair in the introduction of his book on Paul (iirc) states that his reading of the pauline stuff doesn't really attempt to pay much homage to historical accuracy in his reading of pauls letters.

Anyway, it does the old fundie in me's nut in whenever i hear about him being this dude that gives us lefties new 'possibilities' cause i always had him down as a herodian traitor to the messianic jewish scene trying to get the roman imperialists to fuck! Just as an aside, this is an interesting take on paul in the light of that here...

http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/eisenman.html

 

[DotCommunist]

Feel free to point out all those buddhism, shinto and so on threads in which I might have had the opportunity.

for such a keen mind you seem unable to use google, the onsite search function or your own no-doubt vast powers of research. Just like that time you couldn't find any evidence of jewish people condemning israel and then found yourself backed into a corner demanding that all jews apologise for israels actions loudly. You're a freak and not half so smart as you imagine yourself to be

 

[DotCommunist]

- not to mention having a fair bit of responsibility towards future xtian anti semetic constructios
- pro slavery (he advises xtian slave to go back to his master)
- pro nero and giving good quotations to justify all sorts of political authority "becuase that authority is from god" etc (that quote gets used a lot by luther in his vision of the authority of the prince in contrast to other versions of protestantism kicking about such as Thomas Muntzers version xtian communism)


but now, thanks to badiou and zizek, paul has become the flavour of the month "founder of universalism". Badiou, to be fair in the introduction of his book on Paul (iirc) states that his reading of the pauline stuff doesn't really attempt to pay much homage to historical accuracy in his reading of pauls letters.

Anyway, it does the old fundie in me's nut in whenever i hear about him being this dude that gives us lefties new 'possibilities' cause i always had him down as a herodian traitor to the messianic jewish scene trying to get the roman imperialists to fuck! Just as an aside, this is an interesting take on paul in the light of that here...

http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/eisenman.html

cheers for that, bookmarked for later