Letters RSS Feed


Ritual cruelty

I FULLY concur with the comments of Peter Langley, (Ritual slaughter, Oxford Mail, June 28), regarding the primitive, outdated and completely unnecessary practice of ritual slaughter of animals just to satisfy a few words in a book.

It goes beyond comprehension that any person with the most basic reasoning could deny that this practice causes unnecessary terror and suffering to the animal.

Consider the situation: you drive an animal into a slaughter house, manhandle it into a cradle, and, in the case of the Jewish faith, rotate this cradle until the animal is on its back. Then a prayer is said and the animal’s throat is cut, causing a slow death by blood lost.

The Muslim slaughter is along the same lines. The animal lies on its back (in the case of sheep, manually held down), a prayer is said, and its throat is cut.

I see no justification that would permit these outmoded practices to continue today.

Two things come to mind in both cases: one is that the poor animal is frightened prior to its death; and the second is that I have no doubt that the victim does not understand, or cares less about the prayer being said. It only knows that something bad is going to happen.

I often wondered whether this prayer was said for the animal or to beg forgiveness for the slaughterer?

As Mr Langley says, the animal’s life is taken in a most barbaric way, then only the front quarter of the animal is suitable for the Jewish religion. What diabolical hypocrisy.

How many of the meat-eating public care how animals are slaughtered, as long as the remaining portions arrive on their plate?

JAMES BUCKNER Bicester

click2find

Most popular


About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree