Is Shechitah Cruel?
The spilling of blood, whether human or animal, – in the name of religion and at the behest of a God who displays all the symptoms of psychopathy – has always been an integral part of Judaism from its very beginning.
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
To mention just three episodes:
It was Abraham, the alleged progenitor of the Israelites, who showed himself quite prepared to sacrifice his son to prove his obedience to this bully of a God who deserves no respect, let alone worship.
Mordechai, in the name of the king of Persia, commands the Jews to slaughter more than 75,000 Persians. This is the origin of the festival of Purim, a festival that is still joyously and riotously celebrated after 2500 years! (The Jew sure knows how to nurture a grudge! Tell me what gives you joy and I tell you what kind of person you are!)
Menachem massacres the Tiphsahites, ripping up pregnant women! There is no punishment from on high. In fact, God allows him to become king and rule for ten years.
Even if the Biblical examples above – just the tip of a huge iceberg! – are not exactly verifiable historical facts they nonetheless reveal the bloodlust and barbaric mindset of Yahveh’s worshippers. And nothing has changed since those days.
Yahveh’s worshippers, the Jews, have a pathological obsession with blood.
There was the cult of animal sacrifice as it was carried out in the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was NOT, as you are led to believe, a house of God, it was NOT the dwelling place of the Most High. It was no more than a gigantic slaughterhouse and the men working there, conveyor-belt style, were not really priests but glorified butchers – ghouls! To you and me this was a barbaric time, best forgotten. But there is now a movement afoot in the Jewish world to rebuild the temple, complete with animal sacrifice. Jews want to return to the barbaric age that spawned them.
This Jewish obsession with blood plays out on an everyday basis, all over the Jewish world.
There is, for instance, the superstitious ritual of kapparot (part of the Yom Kippur celebration), a wide-spread revolting public spectacle all over Israel, that demands the sacrifice of a chicken. The chicken is a stand-in for a human being. It is first waved above the head and then killed. Better a chicken than the man, the woman or the child. Sure! But why spill blood at all when religious law actually permits the use of money as a substitute for the chicken???
An equal opportunity abuser
Teach them early to be cruel
There is the bloody ritual mutilation of new-born baby boys which the overwhelming majority of Jews accept. Circumcision
There is the unwholesome obsession with menstruation and female hygiene.
And what about human sacrifice? Is there anything to the ages-old accusations against Jews? I do not know the answer to that but I’ll be damned if I allow anybody to forbid me to ask questions!
And then we have shechitah, the Jewish sacrificial method of slaughtering animals for food and for Biblically mandated offerings.
To me, as a vegetarian of more than 30 years, it is pretty obvious that anybody who truly cares about animals and who does not want to inflict pain and suffering on them, not even by proxy, ought to become a vegetarian or vegan and distance himself from any and all animal products, pharmaceuticals included, unless they are certified cruelty-free.
Is it not hypocritical to object, for instance, to the ritual slaughtering method of Jews and Moslems but happily consume meat obtained by other means of slaughter? Exactly! Alas, the reality is that people do eat meat!
Then, at least, let us use, as the law requires, the most humane method of slaughter. And Jewish and Moslem practises do NOT qualify as humane, not by any stretch of the imagination! Let’s have a closer look.
The video below has two segments dealing with the Jew’s blood obsession: circumcision and shechita – if you have the stomach to deal with such barbaric practises! The footage on circumcision starts at 18 mins 50 secs and is followed by the footage on shechita.
The text below is from: http://www.oztorah.com/2010/06/is-shechita-cruel-ask-the-rabbi/
The author is Rabbi R Apple of Sydney.
Comments in italics are mine – BJW
Q.: How would you respond to the allegation that shechitah (the Jewish ritual slaughter of animals) is cruel to animals, which resulted in the recent ban on the practice in New Zealand*?
A.: The Divine plan was originally that we should be vegetarian. God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant upon all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for food” (Gen. 1:29). After the Flood, meat-eating was permitted as a concession to human weakness. Rav Kook says, however, that in the messianic period “people and animals will not eat flesh. No-one will hurt or destroy another living creature. People’s lives will not be sustained at the expense of the lives of animals” (cf. Isa. 11:7).
In the here-and-now meat-eating is clearly permitted; the Torah explicitly says, “When you shall say, ‘I will eat flesh’, because your soul desires to eat flesh, you may eat flesh” (Deut. 12:20). However, there are limitations. Only certain animals, birds and fish may be eaten; the blood must not be consumed; and the method of slaughter must be “as I have commanded you” (Deut. 12:21).
The authorised method of slaughter of animals and birds is shechitah (an invention of the rabbis!). In a religion like Judaism which stands for humanity and compassion in every sense and kindness to animals in particular, it is axiomatic that the prevention of pain to animals is crucial to the manner in which the shochet operates. (The Jew is compassionate? Really? Are you trying to make me laugh? Tell that to the hapless Palestinians! Rabbi, you are a moron! Do you know that it was Hitler’s Germany that introduced the world’s first laws for the prevention of cruelty to animals? )
The animal must be conscious (why?) and sound, and prior to shechitah must not have suffered any injury. The method of slaughter is by a single cut of the neck. The knife is set to exquisite sharpness, with a perfect edge free from the slightest notch or flaw, and examined for any unevenness before the slaughter of each animal. One swift movement of the knife, which causes no pain, severs the trachea, oesophagus and carotid arteries, which ensures practically instantaneous unconsciousness.
The animal is held for shechitah in a casting pen. No specific method of casting is demanded by Jewish law so long as no injury is done to the animal and it is in a position which enables shechitah to be carried out. (the animal is secured by tying or holding it firmly; a large animal is thrown to the ground and then hoisted up; the throat is cut; it then slowly BLEEDS TO DEATH while hanging upside down)
Among the eminent scientists (read: ignoramuses) who endorse the humanity of shechitah, Professor Harold Burrow of the Royal Veterinary College, London, stated in 1960: “No form of slaughter, involving as it does the shedding of blood, presents a pretty sight to the onlooker and one is afraid that this aspect of the question is bound to prejudice the judgement of the man-in-the-street (his reaction is not prejudice; it is called empathy of which you seem to be incapable).
“The severance of the large vessels which supply practically the whole of the blood to the brain obviously leads to the immediate loss of awareness on the part of the animal (it doesn’t!) both of its surroundings and of any painful stimuli. This precludes any possibility of cruelty entering into Jewish ritual slaughter. The actual process of severing these blood vessels occupies only a fraction of a second and is much too rapid to involve any measurable degree of pain.
“Having witnessed the Jewish method of slaughter carried out on many thousands of animals, I am unable to persuade myself that there is any cruelty attached to it. As a lover of animals, an owner of cattle and a veterinary surgeon, I would raise no objection to any animal bred, reared or owned by me being subjected to this method of slaughter.” (I do wonder just how much a Jewish lobby pays for such “testimonials”)
Lord Horder declared that shechitah “is fraught with less risk of pain to the animal than any other method at present practised”.
Sir Ian Clunies Ross, chairman of CSIRO, (another ignoramus) stated in 1956: “I agree entirely with the views expressed by such distinguished physiologists, medical men and veterinarians as Lord Horder, Professor Leonard Hill, Sir Charles Lovatt Evans and many others that shechitah, or the Jewish method of slaughter of cattle, is, when the Weinberg casting pen is employed, as humane a method of slaughter as any other, and one which induces almost instantaneous insensibility. Those who oppose this method of slaughter are actuated, no doubt, by humane motives; they are, however, ill-informed of the physiological facts (actually, you are the one who is ignorant of the facts).”
In the light of all these facts (what facts, rabbi? you have only presented opinions!), there is no way in which the New Zealand Government can justify its decision. Everyone who values truth and justice (that rules out the Yid) must protest strongly and secure a reversal of this misguided and invidious policy.
Shechitah is indefensible on two grounds:
The first reason is:
Regardless of the moronic drivel of Rabbi Apple and his ilk shechita IS cruel! Slaughter without stunning is more prolonged, it is more painful and and it is more distressing to the animal.
Animals feel the pain of religious slaughter Andy Coghlan • New Scientist
Brain signals have shown that calves do appear to feel pain when slaughtered according to Jewish and Muslim religious law, strengthening the case for adapting the practices to make them more humane.
“I think our work is the best evidence yet that it’s painful,” says Craig Johnson, who led the study at Massey University in Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Johnson summarised his results last week in London when receiving an award from the UK Humane Slaughter Association. His team also showed that if the animal is concussed through stunning, signals corresponding to pain disappear.
The findings increase pressure on religious groups that practice slaughter without stunning to reconsider. “It provides further evidence, if it was needed, that slaughtering an animal without stunning it first is painful,” says Christopher Wathes of the UK Farm Animal Welfare Council, which has long argued for the practice to end.
In most western countries, animals must be stunned before they are slaughtered, but there is an exemption for religious practice, most prominently Jewish shechita and Muslim dhabiha. Animal welfare groups have long argued that on welfare grounds, the exemptions should be lifted, as they have been in Norway.
Johnson’s work, funded by the UK and New Zealand agriculture ministries, builds on findings in human volunteers of specific patterns of brain electrical activity when they feel pain. Recorded with electroencephalograms, the patterns were reproducible in at least eight other mammal species known to be experiencing pain.
Johnson developed a way of lightly anaesthetising animals so that although they experienced no pain, the same electrical pain signals could be reliably detected, showing they would have suffered pain if awake.
The team first cut calves’ throats in a procedure matching that of Jewish and Muslim slaughter methods. They detected a pain signal lasting for up to 2 minutes after the incision. When their throats are cut, calves generally lose consciousness after 10 to 30 seconds, sometimes longer.
The researchers then showed that the pain originates from cutting throat nerves, not from the loss of blood, suggesting the severed nerves send pain signals until the time of death. Finally, they stunned animals 5 seconds after incision and showed that this makes the pain signal disappear instantly.
“It wasn’t a surprise to me, but in terms of the religious community, they are adamant animals don’t experience any pain, so the results might be a surprise to them,” says Johnson.
He praised Muslim dhabiha practitioners in New Zealand and elsewhere who have already adopted stunning prior to slaughter. They use a form of electrical stunning which animals quickly recover from if not slaughtered, proving that the stunned animal is “healthy”, thereby qualifying as halal.
Representatives for both faiths responded by claiming that stunning itself hurts animals. A spokesman for Shechita UK says that the throat cut is so rapid that it serves as its own “stun”, adding that there is abundant evidence shechita is humane.
“Shechita is instantaneous, and due to the immediate drop in blood pressure and [oxygen starvation] of the brain, the animal loses consciousness within 2 seconds,” he says. “It conforms to the statutory definition of stunning, in that it is a process which causes the immediate loss of consciousness which lasts until death.”
Ahmed Ghanem, a halal slaughterman based in New Zealand, says that blood doesn’t drain properly from stunned animals, although this has been countered by recent research at the University of Bristol in the UK.
Ghanem cites a 1978 study relying on EEG measurements led by Wilhelm Schulze of the University of Hanover, Germany, apparently concluding that halal slaughter was more humane than slaughter following stunning. But Schulze himself, who died in 2002, warned in his report that the stunning technique may not have functioned properly.
Journal reference: New Zealand Veterinary Journal, vol 57, p 77
The second reason is:
A truly civilized country has one set of laws for all its citizens, regardless of gender or race or ethnicity or religion or social status! There is no preferential treatment for anyone!Period!
The Yid used to whine about not being treated as an equal; now that he has achieved equality in the Western world he arrogantly demands preferential!!! treatment!
To hell with you!
The law requires stunning before slaughter!
And to hell with that ass-kissing “liberal-bleeding-hearts-politically-correct-multi-cultural” crowd that supports your arrogance!
How do you justify granting a special dispensation to Jews and Moslems? Freedom of religion? Well, perhaps we should then allow Satanists to sacrifice animals – as the Jews plan on doing soon when they rebuild their slaughterhouse known as the Temple! Or perhaps we ought to permit the revival of the Hindu cult of the Thuggees which makes murder a religious duty? Where do you stop?
PS (If you are a meat-eater and find the idea of eating meat obtained by this sickeningly cruel method objectionable I have something else for you to ponder: it is almost guaranteed that you eat kosher meat on a regular basis. The laws of kashrut (dietary laws) demand that a certain nerve is removed from the carcass before it qualifies as kosher. This is a time-consuming task and not every butcher is skilled enough to perform it. But as it is a sizeable portion of the carcass it is not simply discarded but sold on ….. to non-Jews and it is bound to find its way onto your table! Bon appetit!)
The excerpt below is taken from the Talmud. This is what the Yid wants to reintroduce in the 21st century!
Is this Satan? Or perhaps the Jewish God? Decide for yourself!
From the Babylonian Talmud
Tractate Tamid 30b-31b
Soncino Edition – page 22-25
They did not use to tie up the lamb but they strung its legs together. Those on whom the lot fell for the limbs took hold of it. It was strung up in such a way that its head was to the south while its face was turned to the west, and the slaughterer stood to the east of it with his face turned to the west. The morning sacrifice was killed by the north-western corner of the altar at the second ring, while the evening sacrifice was killed by the north-eastern corner at the second ring. While one slaughtered another received the blood. The latter proceeded to the north-eastern corner and cast the blood on the eastern and northern sides; he then proceeded to the southwestern corner and cast the blood on the western and southern sides. The remnant of the blood he poured out at the southern base of the altar. [31a] he did not use to break the leg, but he made a hole in it at the joint and suspended it from there. He then began to flay it and went on until he came to the breast. When he came to the breast he cut off the head and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen. He then cut off the legs and gave them to the one to whose lot they had fallen. On completing the flaying he tore out the heart and squeezed out the blood in it. He then cut off the fore legs and gave them to the one to whose lot they had fallen. He then went back to the right leg and cut it off and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen, and the two testicles with it. He then tore open the carcase so that it was all exposed before him. He took the fat and put it on top of the place where the head had been severed. He took the inwards and gave them to the one to whose lot they had fallen to wash them. The stomach was washed very thoroughly in the washing chamber, while the entrails were washed at least three times on marble tables which stood between the pillars. He then took a knife and separated the lung from the liver and the finger of the liver from the liver, but without removing it from its place. he hollowed out the breast and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen. He came to the right flank and cut into it as far as the spine, without however touching the spine, until he came to the place between two small ribs. He cut it off and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen, with the liver attached to it. He then came to the neck, and leaving two ribs on each side of it he cut it off and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen, with the windpipe and the heart and the lung attached to it. He then came to the left flank in which he left two thin ribs above and two thin ribs below; and he had done similarly with the other flank. Thus he left two on each side above and two on each side below. He cut it off and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen, and the spine with it and the milt attached to it. This was really the largest piece, but the right flank was called the largest, because the liver was attached to it. He then came to the tail bone, which he cut off and gave to the one to whose lot it had fallen, along with the tail, the finger of the liver and the two kidneys. He then took the left leg and cut it off and gave it to the one to whose lot it had fallen. By this time they were all standing in a row with the limbs in their hands. [31b] the first had the head and the [right] hind leg. The head was in his right hand with its nose towards his arm, its horns between his fingers, and the place where it was severed turned upwards with the fat covering it. The right leg was in his left hand with the place where the flaying commenced away from him. The second had the two fore legs, the right leg in his right hand and the left leg in his left hand, the place where the flaying commenced being turned away from him. The third had the tail bone and the other hind leg, the tail bone in his right hand with the tail hanging between his fingers and the finger of the liver and the two kidneys with it, and the left hind leg in his left hand with the place where the flaying commenced away from him. The fourth had the breast and the neck, the breast in his right hand and the neck in his left hand, its ribs being between two of his fingers. The fifth had the two flanks, the right one in his right hand, and the left one in his left hand, with the place where the flaying commenced away from him. The sixth had the inwards on a platter with the knees on top of them. The seventh had the fine flour, the eighth the griddle cakes, the ninth the wine. They went and placed them on the lower half of the ascent on its western side, and salted them and came down and went to the chamber of hewn stone to recite the shema’.