Officials To Allow Religious Lamb Slaughter

RALEIGH, N.C. -- Muslims observing a religious holiday will be allowed to sacrifice about 100 lambs at a Johnston County farm this weekend, but state agriculture officials will be keeping a close eye.

The attorney for the farmers said the slaughter in observance of Eid al-Adha isn't that much different than hog killings.

State Agriculture Department officials will be there to observe and possibly pursue a claim that the farmers are violating state law by allowing the slaughter. The slaughter will go on through the weekend after the agriculture officials and the farmers reached a court agreement.

Agriculture officials will document the slaughter and have not waived any right to pursue charges later.

Department spokesman Brian Long said people offering slaughtering services to others need to be licensed, regardless of whether it's a religious activity or a service being provided.

http://www.nbc17.com/news/4117392/detail.html

ignorant here...but let's not be hypocritical either. We slaughter cows everyday...the reason may be different but we still do it.

In fact the lamb is divided into thirds. One third given to neighbors, one third kept for one's own family, and the last third given to the needy.

I can attest if they have a chapter in North Carolina, they are gutless and/or powerless to do or say anything about it.

People are beginning to see that this is a once a year religious deal. That is what I like about America, we may be slow to adapt but we usually come around.

and stuff that the other slaughterhouses abide by.

Who cares if it's Hormel slaughtering a few thousand, or if it's a bunch of muslims slaughtering?

If they're slaughtering and just throwing the meat away, then I have an issue, but so far as I know, the deal is to eat everything that's killed.

Just what america needs... Maybe some enterprising Congressman can propose some legislation... and help get some of that all important muslim ritual sacrifice vote in the next election

Or jail, on charges of cruelty to animals, would be better. Life in prison.

as to killing cows for food, that has a shred of necessity to it. This ritual based on old fairy tales is not necessary.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

to put in jail everyone who slaughters animals?

You'd have a hell of a lot of farmers and hunters to put in jail.

Why is it any different to kill animal for a religious service and then eat, than to kill an animal in a slaughterhouse and then eat it, or to kill it on your farm and then eat it?

I can't tell if you are disgusted by the killing of animals (which would be fine, if you are a vegetarian), or if you are disgusted because they are putting the killing into the context of a religious ceremony?

I find your comment to be ignorant. Not you - just the comment. Deport them? Life in prison? Barbarity?

Sheesh.

Health codes for the butchering, and health codes for the cleanup, and for the disposal.

And I have no reason to believe that they are doing anything different we used to do on the farm when we butchered animals.

Why get your underwear into a knot? Is it because they are sacrificing the animal for religious reasons before eating it? Why should that matter one iota?

I don't know about other parts of the country, but both the mosques out this way work with local Goat farms and slaughterhouses to perform the sacrifice at.

So I suppose all relevant health codes are being followed.

a link to an article about butchering lambs to be eaten for the Islamic Eid holiday.

I see your point is about the animals and not the religion.

Apparently, the Deity gets pissed when you make animals suffer in his name--suffering is for those who can choose it, and they never asked the lambs if they wanted to be whacked for the greater glory of Allah. So this is gonna be quick and as painless as they can make it.

So long as:

1) it's a humane slaughtering operation--yes, there is such a thing

and

2) they eat what they kill

I think this is all right.

...kinda like "military intelligence" or "compassionate conservatism"

MI people really hate that "military intelligence is an oxymoron" crap that's painted on every MI unit supply room, arms room, NBC room...wall in the entire Army.

I gotta tell you about Lockout Thurlow. Poor misguided Lieutenant Thurlow was an MI officer in an infantry battalion--every battalion in the army has an MI officer to do security things. He had his very own set of safe combination changing tools. He had the manual for changing safe combinations that told him to always, always, always try the new combination before you lock the safe so if it turns out you fucked it up you can recover. He always forgot that part and just changed the combination and shut the door. Usually he got away with it, but he managed to lock himself out of the S-2 field safe, the S-2 office safe and the colonel's office safe--forcing us to go over there and drill our way in on three occasions. After we'd broken into the colonel's safe, changed the combination to one that worked and welded the hole closed, the colonel told us to have a good safe trip home and "take fuckin' Lockout Thurlow with you, I don't ever want to see him again." Fortunately for Lockout Thurlow, our colonel liked him and gave him a good position in our battalion--a position in which he'd never have to change the combination on a safe again.

Learn a little before making assumptions.

The "slaughter" is not some kind of barbarian sacrifice. It's in commemoration of the attempted sacrifice of Abraham's son. The cow (or goat, or sheep) is sacrificed for food. The food is given to family, friends, and the poor. It is eaten. It is charity.

This is no blood fest. :eyes:

it will be quite humane and not the butchery that the MSM is trying to portray with the use of the word slaughter.

These animals will be consumed and their will be very little waste. It's to bad that people seem to assume the worst when it comes to religious practice.

religiously. Poor lambies. They going to eat the meat?

It'd divided into thirds, one third is given to neighbors or relitives, one third to the needy and the last third kept for oneself and their family.

Salaam.

cabbages in half instead of sheep or cattle or even little Isaac...

It's a waste of good grain used to feed the animals unless somebody eats them in the end though, and I could care less which religion it is. To me, they're all a set of guidelines attached to asinine stories; which have a knock-on effect of suggesting that the more literally one takes the stories, the more brain-damaged one is. (especially Genesis; where Adam and Eve had two sons. One killed the other. And then for no reason there's a lot more humans who all sinned so that's why Noah made the arkie-arkie... Not only does it rain for 40 days and nights straight through (not possible), it also suggests people lived for 600 years (uh-huh) and that we are all the offspring of Adam and Eve (that's INCEST, y'all...))...

I guess that comment is what passes for religious tolerance.

I am as 'tolerant' as anyone in this world ....

But, as an atheist, I DEMAND the right to speak out against religion, including the rejection and criticism of it's creeds, beliefs, rituals and observances ....

One can be tolerant of the FREEDOM of individuals to express their religious beliefs, and ALSO criticize those religious beliefs .... Vehemently ....

Exactly WHO has the problem here ? ...

WHO is intolerant ? ...

Look into the mirror, friend .... While I despise the false doctrines promoted by those who profess 'faith', I respect their right to enjoy that profession .... The mere criticism of religion, even the outright derision of it, does NOT indicate 'intolerance' ....

To be intolerant, one must attempt to DENY the exercise of that faith ... To 'NOT TOLERATE' it .... Even vehement criticism does NOT imply the denial of that exercise ...

We have crossed paths before, and we will do so again ....

So let it be known: I will freely and comprehensively criticise YOUR faith, based on MY right to free speech, as I also 'tolerate' YOUR right to enjoy your faith ... You apparently wish to confute freely expressed criticism of your faith by calling that criticism 'intolerance' .... Criticism is NOT intolerance ...

Again: WHO is intolerant of what ? ...

Though I am one of the "faithful", you - and even me - should still be free to criticize and critique the faiths of others.

If you think Christianity (or whatever) to be assinine, or dangerous, or superstition, then you should be allowed to say so. Just as I reserve the right to criticize my own faith, and my own denomination; I also reserve the right to critique Islam and Buddhism and even atheism.

I guess my faith is strong enough that I don't feel the need to cry, or fall into despair, or feel like I'm being persecuted, or devalued, when someone criticizes it, or even outright denies its validity. That's their opinion, and I respect it. I'm also mature enough to know that my experience is not normative, and that it applies only to me. Just because I (or anyone else) finds comfort and meaning in Christianity, doesn't mean everyone does, or that they would, or that they should, or that they will.

I'm getting pretty damn tired of the Christian whiners here.

Faith is not scientifically verifiable - so it's always up for debate, critique, and conversation.

Freedom of expression is the paramount notion of liberty ....

Im with you all the way ....

inch humanity forward in evolution of thought and principle.

Woo hoo!!

They appear to be inching backing not forward.

to try to understand why the hatred exists. I think the hatred is justified, and I don't think it is a "choice".

If I hadn't been raised in the church, and saw all the good it does, I would likely not be a Christian, and would likely look upon it with scorn and derision.

When someone hates something, there's usually a reason for it. I, for one, am willing to hear about it. Most times, I've found people's hatred and derision to have some pretty damn good reasons.

I'm not willing to tell people that they are free to say whatever they want, so long as it doesn't make me feel bad, or uncomfortable, or make me think that maybe I'm wrong.

But, maybe that's just me. That's how I grow - listening to other people who are willing to speak the truth to me, and not cower in a corner afraid to speak because they fear that might make me feel bad.

And to be offended, one must choose to be offended.

Somebody has to believe it.

I sure don't.

I am tolerant of your choice to NOT believe in religion and don't call it assinine. Yet you and others here insist not only that you are right, but that you are better than everyone else.

Sure not any definition of tolerance I've ever heard of.

This is the beauty of liberty: I can express my opinions freely ... and in doing so: YOUR right to believe and practice your 'faith' remains intact ....

It is NOT intolerant to call religious beliefs 'assinine' ...

You are quite wrong to say that we who criticise 'insist' we are better than everyone else ... that is simply rubbish .... I am a human being who is not perfect in any regard, and who is subject to criticism at any time ....

To imply that I (we) express an air of 'superiority' is a strawman; I do no such thing ... Your implication is an abusive ad hominem, intended to misrepresent what I am saying in an effort to discredit my message ...

Perhaps you feel a sense of inferiority when presented with criticism, which you mistake for a 'superior' critic .... Your feelings of inferiority are YOUR problem, not mine .... Perhaps you need to better control your own feelings .... Perhaps ....

Out in his backyard. One time my doggie brought the hoofs back to our yard. I cringed and threw them away. That was that.

No big deal.

This Islamic holiday coincided, nearly, with Easter ... and a Lebanese friend of my wife's family brought along his lamb which was ritually slaughtered for this holiday ...

He was a very nice fellow, with a very decent and kindly family, and the roasted lamb was delicious .... Even an atheist appreciates a good meal now an then ...

People eat LOTS of meats in this world ... the fact that someone 'prays' over the act shouldnt condemn the act ...

line up for the Thanksgiving Day slaughter. Soon it becomes the Geese's turn to become the Xmas goose. (Gooses) And then there are the pigs to be rendered into ham for the Easter Feast (Christians only?) And Friday night fish fries for the Catholic Christians. And the Rabbis go to the slaughter house to declare the animals Kosher for the slaughter.

So I feel the Muslims can slaughter all they want of the poor little lambs.

It is all so confusing. Growing up we slaughtered our chickens whenever we damned well pleased and nobody said anything except "Pass the chicken."

180

Years ago.

And they, like some here, say that as long as the sacrifice is as humane as possible any action by the local authorities impinges, not only on their right to practice their religion, but also touches on issues of free speech (free speech of course being broadened to include action)

The case in particular was, if I recall correctly, a Santeria ritual....

wait...here's a web site...too much typing.... and I'm lazy.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/santeri1.htm