Similarly my consumption habits (or anyone's) should not be dictated by YOUR petit-bourgeois moral concerns.
I think animal welfare standards should apply universally without the fuzzy grey area where people say their religion makes it acceptable to slaughter their animal in an inhumane way.
In the United States, there is the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958, a law requiring that all swine, sheep, cattle, and horses be stunned unconscious with just one application of a stunning device by a trained person before being shackled and hoisted up on the line. This act, like those in many countries, exempts slaughter in accordance to religious law, such as kosher shechita and dhabiĥa halal. Most strict interpretations of kashrut require that the animal be fully sensible when its carotid artery is cut.
What is the point of having these welfare standards to ensure that an animal is humanely slaughtered if that law can be non-existent if people claim that their religion says otherwise?
Not really about me, it is about the standards set out and applied to everyone... except of course religious people because we don't want to offend them.
I agree that the idea of morals is subjective, my own morals are different than another persons. However, living animals, like humans, ideally should be regulated in the slaughter industry and have the same welfare standards applied universally...
I can see how consumers of halal only meat would have an issue with how animals are slaughtered but how would it matter to non-halal consumers? Please tell me your qualms are more than just a bunch of religious words.
A halal-only meat-eater would like to satisfy their religious rules even if it bypasses the welfare standards / regulations set out in a country. A non-halal meat-eater would prefer to know that their animal was humanely killed. You can't see how someone would not have a qualm over not knowing how their meat was killed, and if it was humane or not? How silly of you.