Millions of animals are suffering unnecessarily by being slaughtered without stunning to meet religious demands.
That's why we campaign to end religious exemptions to animal welfare laws.
Animal welfare law requires animals to be stunned before slaughter to minimise their pain, suffering and distress. The only exemption is for Jewish and Muslim communities to meet kosher and halal religious dietary preferences.
The scientific consensus is clear that it is more humane to stun an animal prior to slaughter. The slaughter of animals without pre-stunning is permitted in the UK despite a recommendation by the government's own advisory body, the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), that the practice should be banned. FAWC concluded that animals slaughtered without pre-stunning are likely to experience "very significant pain and distress".
RSPCA, Compassion in World Farming and the British Veterinary Association all support an end to non-stun slaughter to improve animal welfare at the time of death.
- 70% of Brits think stunning animals before slaughtering them is more ethical.
- 72% of the population think food produced from religious non-stun slaughter methods should be clearly labelled.
We support the right to religious freedom. But this is not an absolute right. Religious exemptions shouldn't be made to laws meant to prevent unnecessary animal cruelty.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to end the religious exemption that allows animals to be slaughtered without pre-stunning.
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Poland partially revokes its ban on ritual animal slaughter
Posted: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 18:11
The Polish parliament has given in to worldwide pressure from Jewish and Muslim groups and revised its ban on ritual slaughter of animals without pre-stunning.
The Sejm (Polish parliament) made a statement in a position paper sent recently to the country's Constitutional Tribunal. It permits religious slaughter without stunning if the meat is for the consumption of local Jewish and Muslim communities only.
The ritual slaughter of animals carried out for economic or commercial reasons remains illegal.
The Constitutional Tribunal had ruled in 2012 that the Government was acting unconstitutionally by allowing Jews and Muslims to slaughter animals in this way without pre-stunning. An attempt by the Government in 2013 to reverse the ban was rejected by the Parliament.
Meanwhile, Denmark has come under intense pressure from Jewish groups over its ban on ritual slaughter without pre-stunning.
Agriculture and Food Minister Dan Jørgensen banned all slaughter without pre-stunning last month, although the importation of kosher and halal meat is still legal.
Jørgensen was quoted as saying that "animal rights come before religion," a statement he later denied having made during a meeting with Jewish and Muslim community leaders.
Now the Conference of European Rabbis has issued a strongly-worded condemnation of Denmark's ban, saying it is "a fig leaf intended to cover the country's woeful record on animal welfare."
Rabbi Menachem Margolin, president of the Rabbinical Center of Europe, another continental rabbinical organisation, pointed out that Denmark does not have laws banning humans having sex with animals. He said that the dichotomy between allowing sex with animals who cannot give consent and disallowing ancient religious traditions calls into question the sincerity of those who say that the ban is not anti-Semitic. "Those supporting the ban are hypocrites," he added.
Rabbi Yitzchock Loewenthal of Chabad of Denmark said: "As long as hunting and bestiality are allowed in Denmark, the ban against shechita is populist at best."
Rabbi Marc Schneier of the New- York based Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, whose European representatives recently met with Jørgensen, called the ban "pathetic", stating that a country that "legalises animal brothels" and lacks "humane factory-farming standards" cannot claim the moral authority to ban shechita.
"This ban is nothing more than a political stunt to appease a growing far-right faction in Denmark," he said.
However, Ben Williamson of PETA UK – a leading animal welfare organisation - commended Denmark for its ban on ritual slaughter, which he termed one of the "least humane methods of slaughter."
John Blackwell, president-elect of the British Veterinary Association, also came under fire from religious groups last month by arguing that the ritual killing of poultry, sheep and cattle by cutting their throats causes unnecessary suffering to animals. He said that Britain's abattoirs should follow the Danish example.
Mr Blackwell said on the Radio 4 Today programme: "Our view has always been that animals should be stunned. They should be imperceptible to pain as death supervenes.
"We are looking for a meeting of minds to review the evidence base which clearly shows that slaughtering animals without stunning compromises welfare. If that can't happen then I would like labelling at the point of sale that gives the consumer informed choice. If that is not possible we would be looking for a ban for killing without stunning.
"There is no insensibility for these animals by cutting its throat and these remain conscious for seven seconds for sheep and two minutes for cattle and that is not acceptable. As a vet and scientist welfare is top of our list".
This led to Prime Minister David Cameron saying that ritual slaughter would never be banned in Britain during his term in office.
Leading vet calls for an end to religious slaughter
Posted: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 12:44
A leading vet has said the religious slaughter of animals should be banned, unless Muslims and Jews can voluntarily adopt more humane methods of killing.
John Blackwell, president-elect of the British Veterinary Association (BVA), told The Times that the traditional practice of slitting animals' throats and allowing them to bleed to death for halal and kosher meat caused unnecessary suffering.
Mr Blackwell said: "As veterinary surgeons, it is one of the most important issues on our radar. This is something that can be changed in an instant." He said that he respected religious beliefs but "the Danish unilateral banning [was done] purely for animal welfare reasons, which is right".
National and European animal welfare legislation requires all animals to be stunned before slaughter in order to minimise suffering. The only exemption is for religious communities to meet Jewish and Muslim religious requirements.
British Muslim political and social commentator, Mo Ansar, took to Twitter to argue that, rather than being concerned with animal welfare, advocates of humane slaughter were motivated by "anti-theism and anti-Muslim prejudice." He said, "the attack on ritual slaughter is yet another being fuelled by prejudice and ignorance."
His views echoed an editorial in The Times, which said it was "too soon" to insist that animal welfare should trump religious freedom.
According to The Times:
"…it is an ugly fact of history that 19th-century efforts to outlaw shechita in Europe were often fuelled by anti-Semitism, and it is an ugly fact of 21st-century life that the far Right seeks to hijack the campaign against halal butchery for its own ends. When the British National Party pickets a Muslim slaughterhouse, few believe it does so out of concern for the chickens. Legitimate animal welfare activists must have a clear strategy to prevent their cause becoming a proxy for bigotry."
However, The Times editorial also said defenders of religious slaughter should "be ready to give ground as our collective wisdom grows."
"They are defending a cultural practice rooted at least partly in concern for animal welfare. If it can finally be proved that stunning before slaughter reduces suffering, the case for insisting on it will be hard to resist. Eating meat inevitably involves the cruelty of killing animals. People of all faiths, and none, should be able to agree that no doctrine should be an immovable obstacle to minimising that cruelty."
A majority of British Muslims accept electrical pre-stunning and Food Standards Agency figures from 2012 show that more than 80% of animals are stunned before slaughter for Halal meat in the UK. The practice is not accepted under strict Jewish traditions and animals slaughtered for Kosher meat are never stunned before slaughter.
The slaughter of animals without pre-stunning is permitted in the UK despite a recommendation by the Government's own advisory body, the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), that the practice should be banned.
In addition to the BVA, the exemption that permits slaughter without pre-stunning is opposed by the RSPCA, Compassion in World Farming and the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe, amongst others.
The European Union's Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) have said: "Due to the serious animal welfare concerns associated with slaughter without stunning, pre-cut stunning should always be performed."
Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the National Secular Society, commented. "The scientific consensus appears clear that it is more humane to stun an animal prior to slaughter than not to do so. It is therefore both reasonable and appropriate to suggest that, unless religious communities can agree on more humane slaughter methods, their right to religious freedom should, in this instance, be limited in the interests of animal welfare.
"The unreasonable position in this debate that animal welfare should be compromised by the accommodation of rigid and fixed religious doctrines in UK law."
