RabbiO
הרב יונה בן זכריה
You didn't ask me, but for what it is worth, I oppose animal circumcision, especially if it is done right before slaughter.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A law that forbids ritual slaughter (halal, kosher)
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
Many of you think this law intends to target a religious practice, and so therefore a religion.
We just want animals not to suffer...that's why the animal should be killed by firearm before the ritual cut of the animal's juggler..
It's not asking for the moon.
Answering your question...I've nothing against circumcision....and btw...I underline this thread is not against the religion
JesusMyFriend
Rosalia
But obviously then I believe the slaughter of animals should be forbidden. Whether it is for an unnecessary abundance of meat & gluttony or for a religious festival!
JesusMyFriend
Rosalia
I'm feeling sick right now.. I swear...
Altfish
Veteran Member
Why are you worried about cruelty to animals but not cruelty/mutilation of children?
The banning of kosher butchering is a targeting religion. The US meat industry is not humane just because they kill the animal fast.
I can't see any parallelism.
I am from a Catholic country, so circumcision is pretty unusual here...so only certain religious minorities practice it to their babies. Which btw is just a medical practice.
Last edited:
Altfish
Veteran Member
It is NOT a medical practice.There is no medical need for the procedure, it has been proven to have no advantageous effect. Unless there are medical issues with the penis in the first place.
Last edited:
So stunning animals (making them instantly unconscious) before killing them isn't good enough in your mind, and is immoral. Only instant unconsciousness AND death is moral...
But at the same time, mutilating a baby is completely acceptable to you.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
About 1/2 a second, which is not enough time even for pain to be registered.
For example, a goalie in hockey (NHL) had his jugular cut by a sharp skate, and afterword he said that he wasn't aware of any of it.
It seems the most common response here entails the idea that because other forms of animal abuse are legal (e.g., at factory farms), it justifies or mitigates the wrongness of animal abuse for religious purposes. This is fallacious. For instance, the fact that rape of a wife by a husband was not recognized as a crime in the past (until 1970s in the US) did not justify either the legality or morality of rape of the same woman in other contexts or by other persons.
No one here has articulated a valid and sound argument that concludes any form of animal abuse should be condoned by the state.
And I dare say that if someone tormented and killed your treasured pet dog or cat for his own momentary pleasure, everyone here would be horrified, and, if it weren't illegal, would think it should be illegal and want it to be illegal.
No one here has articulated a valid and sound argument that concludes any form of animal abuse should be condoned by the state.
And I dare say that if someone tormented and killed your treasured pet dog or cat for his own momentary pleasure, everyone here would be horrified, and, if it weren't illegal, would think it should be illegal and want it to be illegal.
LOL
You didn't ask me but I'll tell you my view. Circumcision is fine with me as long as the person being circumcised has consented. Otherwise, genital mutilation is horribly immoral.
Spiderman
Veteran Member
Could you share more about the first nationalist party?
It takes significantly longer than 1/2 a second for a human to lose consciousness once the blood supply to the brain has been halted.
You aren't speaking from any actual concern for animal welfare here though, otherwise you'd see that prior stunning is approved for the purposes of humane slaughter for one, and that for two animal slaughter is by definition inhumane. So if you care about animals, become a vegetarian at least. Then you stand on firm ground. Selective outrage is transparent.
Altfish
Veteran Member
That's the problem most people who are circumcised haven't given consent.
Yeah. Big problem, to my mind. In the US it's specifically illegal to mutilate girls' genitals without their consent, while doing the same to boys is tolerated and even promoted as good and a religious right of the parents. It's just sick.