Black pudding is Halal, apparently

[Napoléon]

Make sure it's halal!

On a serious note, for the first time ever I asked in restaurant whether their meat was halal/kosher. It wasn't, but if it was I wouldn't have eaten it. I'm 100% against it, and would otherwise be illegal in the UK had it not been given a religious exemption. I'm not squeamish about slaughter (I'll gut a carcass if I need to), but it is inhumane compared to stunning prior to the kill.

I dislike it when I speak to people who try to defend it as better than stunning. I accept that stunning is not perfect and never will be, but cutting the throat of an animal and letting the blood drain whilst uttering some mumbo jumbo over it for no good reason (not exactly like you're hunting to survive) is just fucking psychopathic in my eyes.

A lot like when I hear Sikhs try and defend how wearing a turban gives them just as much protection from falling objects on a building site than even the most basic PPE. Idiots. Cognitive dissonance if I ever saw it.

There's actually a sikh biker gang in Australia that have a religious exemption on wearing helmets because apparently their turbans provide as much protection. I saw this on reddit and got downvoted to oblivion when I questioned it. 

But yeah, I think the current methods of killing in abattoirs aren't great and I've seen some pretty horrific things happen in them, but it's something people have to deal with. It needs to be improved IMO and more needs to be done for animal welfare, but even in comparison to qurbani, stunning an animal prior to killing it seems like a better way of doing it. 

Having said that, there's no pleasant way of efficiently killing millions of animals year on year to feed the people of the world. What're you gonna do? Stop killing them? 

Good luck with that notion.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/og/og-00003.htm

Basically, the employer/ construction site company can be sued for full liability if an object on a building site falls on a Sikh who is subsequently injured on the head from not wearing adequate (and legally mandated) PPE.

It is totally ludicrous. There is the chance that, as an employer, you have to pay out for an injury that would otherwise fall outside of the scope of liability (if the employer had fulfilled it's requirements and the employee had failed to follow guidelines) simply because someone puts their belief over their health, even knowing the risks.

[Napoléon]

That is absolutely fucking stupid.

This article of faith potentially brings them into conflict with legal provisions requiring head protection to be worn in workplaces where there are risks of head injury arising from the work undertaken.

I cannot even find the words to describe how utterly and stupendously stupid this is.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

In Brum they're doing a lot of regeneration works for New Street and I see Sikhs without PPE all the time. It's really quite disturbing.

[Napoléon]

It's really quite disturbing.

Heh, or disturbaning...

I'll see myself out.