Showing posts with label quran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label quran. Show all posts

Sunday, May 11, 2014

To Halal or Not to Halal

Okay, I found another twitter topic to discuss. Yay. Good ol' twitter. Perfect for writing prompts. The issue this time? Halal vs non halal meat. There has been quite a kurfuful regarding the use of halal meats in the UK by some chain restaurants, which has brought a wide ranging discussion about how meat is slaughtered, the role religion plays in this slaughter and in society as a whole, the desire for people to have halal meat labelled as such and then outright right wing attacks on everything to do with Islam or Muslims (as well as right win religious attacks on all that is of the kufr).

Now, apparently, when the glorious Quran was revealed to everyone's favourite prophet, Mohammed, god had a specific way in which he wanted animals slaughtered. This involved a slitting of the neck of the animal and having a lovely prayer said over the beast. That god. He thought of everything, didn't he?

Some say that halal is a brutal, cruel way of killing an animal because it is not stunned before the life ending procedure. Others say is it more humane because....well, god said it was. Truthfully? I don't see it as being any better or worse than non halal slaughter. In theory, both are supposed to be humane or not humane depending on who is determining this (which is not the animals who aren't able to tell us what they would prefer). Too much of our meat comes from factory farms and mass slaughterhouses that hardly provide animals with a decent life. At the same time, there is a growing desire by people to have their meat prepared in more humane ways, wanting to ensure that it is free range and free of growth hormones. They want a better life for the animals they eat before eating them. So, this desire is growing. People want less brutality, but still love a good burger!

Proponents of halal meat say that their method is the antithesis to the brutality of non halal meat while proponents of non halal meat say their method is the antithesis to the brutality of halal meat. Both are right and both are wrong. On paper, both systems look good. In non halal, animals are supposed to be stunned before slaughter. The fact is, that this can often be botched or not adhered to in the most humane of ways. Likewise, the idea that a quick slice to the throat provides a snappy demise is often not properly adhered to with not sharp enough blades, slightly off slices, etc. In the end, both systems have their flaws and benefits.

The demand in the UK is at least for labelling of halal meat so that people know what they are getting and can decide for themselves. Seems fair and reasonable. Yet, for some reason, there seems to be a backlash against this idea. Why? I have no clue. Just label the stuff. There are others calling for an outright banning of religious slaughter like Denmark did. Is this right? Well, sure, I'm not against it, nor for it. I don't believe some god of some sort gave man the idea of how to slaughter animals. It was a man made idea and it's from 1400 years ago (at least in terms of halal). If we have better methods now, and we know how to kill an animal in a more humane way because, you know, we have evolved in our understanding of the world and the creatures we exist with, then we should go with the best method possible. I'm not sure that halal is necessarily, however, as horrible as some say. Again, not being an animal that is about to have it's throat slit, I have no clue what an animal would prefer.

There seems to be some ridiculousness on all sides. First off, I'm getting a bit tired of the Muslims who are critical of non Muslims who wish to not eat halal meat. I've seen them be called ignorant racists, over reactionaries, etc. At the same time, if Muslims were eating non halal meat that they thought was halal, the outrage would be significant. So, there seems to be a bit of a lack of understanding of peoples desires outside of the Muslim community, dismissing the requests of non Muslims. Basically, I say, if you would refuse to eat non halal meat, don't get mad at people because they don't want to eat halal meat. At the same time, we have people saying this is another case of creeping Sharia and must be fought and using it as another way to be right wing idiots. Whatever. Both sides are kind of clued out.

Basically, the solution is, just label the stuff. Make sure people know what they are consuming. We have/request labels for everything from GMO's, free range, organic, place of origin, quality, etc. I don't understand why labelling halal meat as halal meat as an issue. One person on twitter said that it would open up restaurants and people to attacks and they shouldn't be singled out. Huh? Look, just label the stuff. Nothing wrong with it.

It's interesting though that the fury echoes an experience had when we were living in Qatar. Qatar is a pork free country. You can't even buy proper marshmallows because apparently they contain pork by products. Alcohol could only be purchased at a few select restaurants, and at a store in the industrial area that you had to have a special permit to shop at. The store thought they might import some pork so that people with this permit could indulge. Oh man, the uproar. The store was run by Qatar Airways. There were calls to boycott the airline, and so much furor over the idea that a bit of pork may enter the country. The backlash was immense. There, however, when there is anger like this, it is called asking others to adhere to "cultural sensitivities". When it happens in the UK...it's racism...:) Mind you, I still can't figure out which race Islam is, or what race halal slaughter is associated with.

Russell Brand visited the East London Mosque (guided by non other than our good friend Mo Ansar) the other day and said something to the nature of "If you don't want to eat halal, become a vegetarian not a racist". Again, there seems to be a lack of understanding of the fact that Islam isn't a race. As I have said a million and one times, it is a religion, a set of ideas that are open to disagreement, debate, satire and even outright dislike. It is not, and should never be, immune to criticism. It is a religion. It's not okay to hate Muslims just because they are Muslims. That's hating people. But to hate ideas? Not an issue. The idea of halal meat is just that, an idea within a greater set of ideas of how the world should be. Therefore, it should not be protected. It should be questioned, and struck down if shown to be wrong.

So, the issue of halal vs non halal is complex yet simple as the same time. Let's go with the simple part of this: Just label the stuff. Accept that there are going to be differing opinions. If determined to be a completely inhumane way of dealing with slaughter, then consider banning it. It isn't racist to ban a practise that isn't good. Will people have an issue with it? Of course. But, first and foremost, animal welfare should come first here. At the moment, because I don't know enough because I am not an expert in this field, I say just label it. If there is conclusive evidence that halal slaughter is not a good way to go, then I'm not against banning it. At the same time, I think we should be looking at factory farming and mass slaughter practises as well. There is a huge movement scrutinizing them, so it's not like it is an ignored issue as some on the pro halal side claim. It is an issue and many are working on it. But there is no doubt, that is just as big of an issue as halal meat. Let's just do the best we can for the animals. Label meat so people know the source. And continue to research the best methods to slaughter.


Sunday, April 3, 2011

Terry Jones: Legally a Jerk

Do I really have to go into the background of this story? Probably not. This has been a fairly well publicized one. As many know by now, a Pastor of a tiny church in Florida by the name of Terry Jones burned a copy of the Qur'an. You may be familiar with this book? In the last few days, Afghanistan has been rocked by violent protests over this. On the day they began, 11 people were killed, 7 of them being UN workers, two of them being beheaded. As I write this, protests are in their third day, and seem to be spreading.

Now, I don't know Terry Jones personally. I've never met him. But based on what I have read about him, I can't say I am overly fond of the guy. I don't think he did a very nice to thing when he burned a Qur'an. However, I have to be quite frank in saying that killing people over this action is incredibly ridiculous. Some have come out saying that Terry Jones has blood on his hands and is responsible for what is going on in Afghanistan. He is not. He has been roundly criticized throughout the world for his actions, but what he did was not illegal where he is from. Terry Jones is guilty of being a jerk. That is it. How people have responded is up to them personally, and they are responsible for their actions. What is most ridiculous about this is that it was one man in a tiny church in Florida who burned the Qur'an. That's it. That's all. Nothing more. To say the least, I think it is fair to say that the violent backlash has been disproportionate at best, completely idiotic at worst. He has been roundly criticized. I agree with the criticism. That's about as far as things should go. But, NO, people's heads rolled (literally!). And, TODAY, Hamid Karzai, the fearless leader of Afghanistan is calling on the US Congress to do something about this guy. What?? What should they do about a man in Florida legally being a jerk? 

Look, there are no blasphemy laws in the US. Although I believe burning a Qur'an could be considered inciting hate, it was done on private property and therefore he was not doing anything against the law. Besides, there are plenty of hate groups in the US who are protected by freedom of speech laws. That is the way it works in the US. Freedom of speech is alive and pretty important. Does Mr. Karzai want the US to adopt blasphemy laws so that the people in his country don't go completely berzerk and start cutting off peoples heads?? That doesn't seem like a good idea at all. Should Terry Jones be punished? Well, he didn't actually break any laws, did he? No, he didn't. So, no, he shouldn't be punished, other than what is dished out in the court of public opinion. He has pissed off a lot of people. Fine. But, nothing he has done should be resulting in beheadings and riots. It can be met with anger and frustration, with speaking out against him, by making one's feelings known. But, when it get's to the point where people are dying, things have gotten way too out of hand, and it isn't the fault of Terry Jones.