That's fair enough and it's your opinion. You don't have to eat it and I agree that companies should label their meats... But what are your actual reasons? Is it just the method, as opposed to other "humane" methods? (I use the word "humane" but there is nothing humane about killing an animal for food, stunned or unstunned)
It's 6am and I haven't slept, so forgive me if this is a bit all over the place.
By humane I mean as little suffering as possible, and I also include the quality of life the animals have had. For instance I love KFC chicken. Absolutely love it. Then one day I learned about the conditions the chickens are kept in, how they live their entire lives in a cage, in darkness, never in their lives seeing daylight. How the conditions are so bad they can, from what I recall, go insane, try to peck themselves to death, be stuck in cramped shacks with broken legs and wings, I could go on about it. It was absolutely horrific. I can say, without exaggeration, that it was mass torture. So for moral reasons I've never eaten at KFC since. I refused to fund them.
On the opposite side of the spectrum there are people who specialise in giving animals meant for food good lives. The effects are incredible, if you look at the meat, you wouldn't believe it comes from the same animal. So yes, I consider quality of life as well as method of slaughter.
I've always been curious about lobster, but I've never ate it for moral reasons. I remember hearing an urban myth that lobsters, when being boiled, will scream. Some animal rights activists would use it to justify views that boiling lobsters (and crabs as well) was cruel and shouldn't be allowed. There were a number of people who tried to debunk this. Chefs were asked about it and replied it wasn't true, they don't scream, which I wouldn't argue as I never believed it for one moment anyway. If there ever was a screaming sound I imagine it was stream escaping from the shell. They are marine animals. They have not evolved the ability to suck in air and scream. If they tried this underwater, they would drown. They cannot scream. But that doesn't mean they don't feel pain.
Crustaceans are incredibly sensitive to even the slightest changes in water temperature. The idea they don't suffer is a fairy tale. If you've ever seen them being boiled alive, you can watch them thrash around and try to get out of the pot. To me this was horrific. However, I did last year come across a sea food restaurant (the name escapes me) which serves lobster and crab and has a device to kill them in an instant. Zap! Brain death. They're killed in an instant and then cooked. It's supposed to be pain free, but if there was pain, from what I understand it would of been so quick it wouldn't even really register. Now that place I would consider eating at.
What makes something humane or not humane today is the options available for us. A number of imams (and rabbis as kosher involves the exact same slaughter ritual) have taken to saying that halal is all about animal welfare, that it's actually more humane than modern accepted methods. This is untrue. Vets have tested these claims and it's been proven false time and time again.
But okay, let's say for arguments sake I accept what the imams say that the point of halal slaughter is animal welfare. Mo said (I forget if I read this in quran or hadith) when seeing someone about to slaughter an animal that it's better to use a sharp blade. I don't really have a problem with interpreting this as "It's better to use a really sharp blade for a good clean cut because it's kinder than using a dull blade which will take longer and cause more suffering for the animal". If I accept this argument then I can say that 1400 years ago this was the humane method, for the simple reason it was the most humane option available. Today it isn't. So halal becomes the immoral option for me personally (note these are limits I apply to myself, I don't insist others should have them forced on them) for the simple fact that we have more humane methods. 1400 years ago, a sharp blade was more humane than a dull blade. Today, stunning is more humane than slitting the throat and watching it bleed to death.
Just as lab grown meat, if it becomes widely available, will be what I'd choose for moral reasons. If you haven't heard of it, google "Test tube burger London". It was meat grown in a lab, literally a burger grown from stem cells. I think it cost around a quarter of a million. If this does become widespread and easily available in my lifetime then I'll have to rethink my choice of meat because of a new option available to me. Just as now the question is which is better, halal meat or normal meat, in this hypothetical future the question will be which is better, normal meat or lab grown meat.
It really is a stickler for me. I am genuinely disturbed I could of been giving money to halal providers against my knowledge. I won't even buy eggs unless they're free range.
Topic: Thoughts on Subway and Pizza Express halal "revelations"