Meta description: Religious slaughter is a phenomenon that exists worldwide. The reason behind the banning of religious slaughter of animals is based on the fact that non-religious slaughter of animals is considered less painful.
Should Religious Slaughter of Animals be Banned?
Introduction
The question of religious slaughter of animals is one that every democracy has difficulty answering, more so when it’s a secular country like India. Religious slaughter refers to animals being killed following specific religious practices. The most common examples of this are halal meat and kosher meat. In India, religious slaughter also includes sacrificing animals for religious rituals. The question of religious slaughter of animals is one that hinges on whether the animals are feeling pain or not.
Religious slaughter is a phenomenon that exists worldwide and it primarily hinges on the fact that different religions believe that slaughtering the meat in their religious way leads to healthier meat. The main argument against religious slaughter is related to the fact that non-religious slaughter of animals, which includes stunning or sedating the animal before slaughter, is considered less painful.
Reasons
Let us look at two reasons why the religious slaughter of animals need not be banned.
- The first and most important reason is that people want to ban religious slaughter of animals because they believe that it’s more painful than non-religious order. This belief that there is such a thing as humane slaughter and non-humane slaughter in itself is an oxymoron. There is no way to know if the animals that are slaughtered in non-religious ways are properly stunned before the slaughter. Many times stunning slaughter may be done incorrectly, which leads to the animals feeling pain anyway.
- Second, some people argue that when animals are religiously slaughtered they are tortured until they die due to the lack of stunning. It is a known fact that the animals feel a great sense of fear moments before they are stunned and hence are tortured anyway. For example, when an animal is chained and hung before slaughtering it, it still feels the torture that lot of people associate with religious slaughter. When they see the animals before them in line killed right in front of their eyes, something that they frequently experience, they may still feel tortured. Hence, as long as we are open to and are accepting the slaughter of animals, there is no point in drawing a line just when it comes to religious slaughter.
Conclusion
The slaughtering of animals in this scenario has been put under a magnifying glass due to the fact that it is related to religion. In reality, it is not significantly different. Treating it differently is nothing more than being discriminatory and goes against the very secularism and democracy that we are proud of.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is religious slaughter of animals?
Religious slaughter of animals is when animals are slaughtered for food or for certain religious rituals.
2. What are some examples of religious slaughter of animals?
Some examples of religious slaughter of animals are halal meat, where the animals’ throat is slaughtered, and once they have bled out, their meat is consumed.
3. How is religious slaughter different from other kinds of slaughter?
The primary difference between religious slaughter compared to other types of animal slaughter is that other kinds of slaughter usually use a process called stunning before slaughtering the animal.
4. Does stunning truly ensure that animals are not hurt?
This question needs to be answered by first keeping in mind what we mean by hurting animals. If we mean only physical pain, then in the cases where stunning is done properly, after it, the animal does not feel any pain. However, stunning itself hurts the animal, and even after stunning the animal may be able to witness its slaughter, causing a lot of mental and emotional pain.
5. Do you think banning religious slaughter will really have any impact?
I don’t think banning religious slaughter will have any relevant impact. First, because religious slaughter is not the only kind of slaughter that hurts animals, and if we truly want to ensure that animals are slaughtered or not hurt, then banning only religious slaughter is pointless.
