Nowadays we witness an endless debate between carnivores and vegetarians, when one of the arguments is about the well-being of the animals. In the meantime, countries of the “new world”, especially in Europe, formulate new rules about how animals should be killed in order to be eaten. The main idea is electrocution, namely death by electric shock, which is immediate and involves no extra suffering for the animal.
The Jewish religious way of slaughtering an animal (and to a similar extent also the Islamic one) has been considered “merciful” towards animals. It involves a quick cut into the animal’s neck and then letting the blood drain. It was considered merciful since it’s a relatively quick and painless method of killing an animal using old technology.
However, “relatively” and “old technology” are the keywords here. Since we now have better technology, if one’s reasoning process also includes the animal itself, then they should obviously apply the new technology rather than the old one. Still, when it comes to religion, the animal is second in place. The rules come first. Thus we reach an absurd situation in which a method that was probably devised in order to make it easier for the animal – actually makes it harder. It’s like forgetting the origins and sticking to the temporary results.
— * — * —
But it doesn’t end here. Since religion must be protected at all cost, one has to struggle against new rules and behaviors that oppose it. So how do you struggle against a new rule that is made to help animals? You present it as a new rule that is made to disturb people. Hence you sometimes hear about those new legislators being accused of… antisemitism.
To summarize it all in one sentence: Even though our ancestors meant to help animals, let’s torture the poor things and accuse those who attempt to protect them as being racist towards our ancestors.
The next thing on board? Probably child circumcision.