A Critique of the Cultural Defense of Animal Cruelty

Journal of Religion in Europe, 2015

In 2011, the Dutch House of Representatives voted for the first time in its history for banning the practice of unstunned ritual slaughter in accordance to Jewish and Islamic rites. How should this remarkable vote be understood? In order to answer this question, a critical discourse analysis has been carried out. Three discourses are discerned in the debate: ‘unstunned ritual slaughter as an outdated practice,’ ‘ritual slaughter as a form of ritual torture’ and ‘unstunned ritual slaughter as a legitimate religious practice.’ The growing parliamentary support for the first two mentioned discourses is related to recent changes in the Dutch political landscape. In a wider context, it is related to a shift in the national self-conception of the Netherlands and, linked to that, to a change in the perceived position of traditional religious minorities within Dutch society in the aftermath of 9/11 and the ‘Fortuyn revolt.’

2015

Current laws on the treatment of animals in all liberal countries demand that animals be stunned before being slaughtered in order to prevent their suffering. This is derived from a widely-shared concern for animal welfare. However, in many Western countries, exemptions from this legal requirement have been granted to Jewish and Muslim communities so that they can continue to perform ritual slaughter. Hence, there seems to be a clash between the right to religious freedom and the duty to minimize animal suffering during slaughter. In this paper, I want to propose a solution to this seemingly irreconcilable clash. To understand whether these two principles are really incompatible, we need to establish exactly what they demand of us. I argue that there is no convincing reason to take the suffering involved in the killing of animals more seriously than the suffering experienced by animals during their lives (on farms). If so, we might demand that ritually slaughtered animals be “compensated” for their experiencing a more painful death by raising these animals in better conditions than others.

US-China Law Review, 2016

The relationship between the animal protection and the respect of tradition is an important issue in Animal law. The question is examined from a perspective which is both empirical and comparative. The case-law of several countries and legal systems have been taken into account:

Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2018

M any local traditions, in Indonesia, involving the painful death of animals enjoy state protection, and animals are sacrificed to honour those traditions. As with bullfighting , many other ritual killings are more painful and messy in practice than theory because their victims are alive, kicking, and fighting for their lives. In some regions, there is a popular dogma that the number of buffaloes sacrificed to be one of the measuring of wealth or success of family members who are holding a traditional ceremony. The interesting thing in these rituals is that the type of buffalo sacrificed have a diverse caste. In those rituals there is someone who has been mandated to spanking buffaloes that have been tied at the pole. After being speared several times, the buffalo was then snared with rope to make sure the animal died. Let's consider, another example, coming from the slaughter of still conscious animals in Indonesian abattoirs. Basically, abattoirs should be legally required to stun animals, either electrically or with a captive bolt pistol, so that they are unconscious, and cannot feel pain, when killed. Some Indonesian, however, might reject stunning. They insist that animals must be fully conscious, while a knife is inserted in their throats to cut their windpipe, their gullet, their carotid arteries, and their jugular veins. The blood is thus drained from their bodies until they lose consciousness, and die.It expressed concern not only about the slow and painful way in which the ritual slaughter actually proceeded, but also about the pens employed, which force animals into an unnatural position-lying on their backs with their necks extended-likely to cause them both discomfort and terror. It also claimed the slaughter was often rushed, and that animals were sometimes shackled and hoisted onto the bleeding trail before they had fully lost consciousness. With regard to those phenomenon, animals also have case report Abstract | It is obviously true that traditions represent a critical piece of our culture. They help form the structure and foundation of our families and our society. They remind us that we are part of a history that defines our past, shapes who we are today and who we are likely to become. However becausethere is dogma to avoid danger of damaging the underpinning of our identity, traditional values are often deployed as an excuse to animal cruelty traditions. For example in some parts of Indonesia regions, where local traditions,in Indonesia, involving the painful death of animals enjoy state protection in which animals are intentionally sacrificed to honour those traditions.This can be valued as a polysemic phenomenon. There is no doubt that animals bring us enormous benefits; the question however is whether this justifies us using them without consideration of their intrinsic value. Then it should be noted that incidents of animal cruelty are often under reported due to society's negative perspective of this crime and because it is often a solitary, secretive activity others may not be aware of. Although the interests of animals often conflict with the demands of society, society remains responsible for the welfare of the animals involved. Considerations regarding animal welfare ought to be based on veterinary, scientific and ethological norms, but not on sentiment. And although animals do not have fundamental rights, human beings have certain moral obligations towards them.

2018

Until one has loved an animal, a part of one's soul remains unawakened .

Society & Animals, 2013

2003

85 In 1903 W.E.B. Du Bois predicted, “The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color line” (1969). One hundred years later, we can hope that the twentieth century achieved important advances for human liberation—not only racial but also sexual and political. Will that moral trajectory—the expansion of fundamental protections now easily seen as the hallmark of the last century—continue? Will the problem of the twenty-first century be the problem of the species line? For protections to evolve to include nonhuman species, religions— through their leaders, their institutions, and above all their believers— must take seriously the important role that they have played, and certainly will continue to play, in humans’ engagement with the lives beyond our species line. Religions have such a central role in the transmission of basic images and values regarding living beings that, without their help, the problem of the species line will not be solved in this century. A centra...

Choice Reviews Online, 2013

Derecho Animal. Forum of Animal Law Studies

One of the more intractable issues associated with animal law and ethics concerns responsibly regulating the slaughter of animals according to the requirements of the Jewish religious tradition and some interpretations of the Islamic religious tradition. Most Western liberal democratic societies require animals to be stunned before slaughter to ensure they are insensible when killed. However, the Jewish tradition and many interpretations of the Islamic tradition prohibit pre-slaughter stunning. In these traditions, animals are killed according to specific religious rituals that involve cutting the animal's throat and permitting it to exsanguinate without prior stunning. These requirements therefore come into direct conflict with Statutes, Codes and Regulations of many Western countries intending to give expression to animal welfare policies by requiring pre-slaughter stunning. However, such practices are also protected by international and domestic human rights instruments guaranteeing freedom of religious practice and expression. Recent decisions of European Courts demonstrate the difficulties that arise when countries attempt to regulate this conflict. In exploring several of these recent decisions, this article intends to outline the parameters of this conflict and to suggest a potential way forward to responsible regulation of such practices.

Ethics in Progress, 2022

Humanity has practised animal sacrifice for the greater part of its history, from the time of the Neolithic Revolution. The ritual forms have varied, depending on the culture. They have also been subject to change, in connection with the development of human understanding and knowledge of animals, which is reflected in the ontological, cultural and moral status assigned to animals in the human world. Sacrificing animals involved not only killing them in a particular way – their treatment was sometimes sophisticated or ‘ritualistic’; often it was simply cruel. Human attitudes towards non-human living beings have also evolved in the context of animal killing and sacrifice. The treatment of animals reveals a great deal about human beings – in terms of their culture, beliefs, and morals. The article outlines this issue in a historical manner, referring to the practices adopted in selected cultural circles (in the Mediterranean Basin): ancient Mesopotamia and Greece, as well as in Judaism and Islam. The key findings of researchers are presented, along with the evaluations of philosophers, ethicists and anthropologists.