Amendment to bill could reduce non stun slaughter in the UK

[Catherine]

Chris Loder, an animal welfare advocate is planning an amendment to the kept animals bill. The purpose of the amendment is to reduce the number of non stun kills of animals in the UK. Non stun kills are done for religious reasons. Certain types of Halal and Kosher require that the animal be aware at the time its throat is cut. 
The idea is to reduce the number of animals killed that way by not mass slaughtering animals that way. Instead, non stun animals would be a special order for those whose religion has that requirement.
There would be a requirement to label non stun meat so people can make a choice about whether to eat it or not.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/o...ng-stunned

This is a big issue. There is a conflict between animal welfare and religious practice. If we are going to respect animals and look out for their welfare then there must be a way to deal with this. The real solution is to adopt a vegan diet. No animals need to be slaughtered, stunned or not stunned.

There is no religion that objects to a vegan diet.

[LPC]

Absolutely right! Being vegetarian or vegan means that no animals have to be killed expressly for human consumption.

Are humans so fixated on meat that they can't live without it?! There are plenty of sources of good protein and B vitamins available without recourse to eating dead animal bodies.

There are two notable exceptions in world religions: Sikhs are actually *forbidden* to eat meat which has been ritually slaughtered and almost all are vegetarian or vegan. Jains do not eat any living animal. Very strict Jains even filter their water to ensure that there isn't an insect in it.

But as you say, if one becomes vegetarian or vegan, then slaughter of any kind is out of the question. It is a simple question of compassion for other forms of life.

[Catherine]

Quote:But as you say, if one becomes vegetarian or vegan, then slaughter of any kind is out of the question. It is a simple question of compassion for other forms of life.

What I find unbelievable is the insistence of some religions that they only eat meat that is slaughtered with cruelty. They won't allow an animal to be stunned first.
There may have been a time thousands of years ago when such practices had a health and safety component. Any meat they ate would have been from a freshly killed healthy animal.
We don't need to do that now. We don't need to eat meat now. We have many alternatives. 
For those who do eat meat there are less cruel options.

There is no need to insist on cruelty for religious reasons. That seems very strange.