This has been a difficult year for multiculturalism in Europe. And it seems that there may be a new controversy in the making as some Dutch lawmakers plan to pass a legislation against ritual slaughter in Netherlands, thereby disallowing Muslims as well as Jews to produce Halal and Kosher meat, respectively. This article examines this issue and its various dimensions.
Some members of the Dutch parliament have been advocating lately the prohibition of slaughter methods prescribed by religious regulation of the Muslim and Jewish communities, causing dismay among the two religious minority communities in Netherlands. The new legislation, having been passed by the Parliament already this June and awaiting consideration in the Dutch Senate, if put into effect, will bar the Muslims and Jews to slaughter animals before these have been stunned; effectively making butchering of animals according to religious rites illegal. If successful, the ban will affect almost a million Muslims living in Netherlands as well as an estimated Jewish community of 40,000-50,000 adherents.
The bill was initially proposed by The Party of the Animals, a political outfit with only two seats out of the 146-seat Dutch Parliament on animal welfare grounds, holding the viewpoint that failing to stun the animals before slaughter subjects them to unnecessary pain and that there is a “worldwide consensus among scientists that animals suffer terrible if they are not first stunned before slaughter.” When brought to the Parliament for debate and discussion it gained support from the centrist parties ‘on secular scientific grounds.’ The move for such a ban, in itself, is a controversial step, having the potential to spark tensions. Yet the entire philosophy of this movement acquires a different meaning, when one notices that controversial personalities like Geert Wilders are its leading supporters.
Analysing the case at hand from the sociology of religion perspective is extremely interesting. First of all is the pluralism debate that lies at the heart of the affair; the increasingly visible nexus of cultural conservatism movements and political advocacy, and the widening gulf between public religion and the secular mindset. Secondly, one wonders whether Europe’s Enlightenment scheme is, in anyway, slowly changing? Thirdly is the fact that this potential ban does not only affect the Muslim community but also the orthodox Jewish groups, something which many Muslims groups may find hard to accept, the general perception being that conservative Europeans have always been pro-other faiths, so as to speak, in comparison to Islam. Also, it will be essential to see how the religious communities, particularly the Muslims across the world, react to this step.
It will also be important to see how the socio-economic dimension of this ban will affect the two communities, if it is put into effect, since both will have to import meat from other parts of Europe for their consumption. Will other European countries also follow suit? And given the privilege to engage with this topic on an existential level, the ban somehow arrives as an intricate test for all of us about what ‘rights’ actually are, whether of human communities or animal populations. And at a deeper level, it should also make us engage in the query about what pain really means, whether to animals or for humans.
In the days ahead, it will be interesting to see how the Muslim and Jewish communities negotiate with the situation. Will the Muslim community in Netherlands join hands with their fellow People of the Book for an organised, collective effort towards revoking the ban or will the traditional negative views dividing the faiths let the ban’s supporters prevail.
Similarly what will be the strategy of the two faith communities to ‘prove’, so as to speak, the validity of slaughtering rites not on religious grounds only but rather, perhaps just as significantly, scientific grounds. Currently the International Union for Muslim Scholars, under Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has been the leading voice for the Muslims in this issue asking ‘Western governments to initiate a scientific symposium inviting specialists on the animal world, religious scholars from minorities and the European Council for Fatwa and Research to discuss the means of scientific slaughter.’ However, Muslim scholarship with its traditional attitude of believing in and propagating taken for granted matters – without realising that the secular-scientism of the West is challenging many of these – may find this to be a perplexing task.
After controversies on religious symbols, dress and architecture as well as freedom of expression, we may soon witness a schism over food and faith in a changing state of affairs in Europe too. Voting on the issue is likely to take place sometime in December. Whether the legislation will be approved by the Dutch senate or not is unclear as yet as some Dutch MPs are calling it a very sensitive matter. However the issue itself shows that the debate over pluralism, religious values, human, and now animal rights, is here to stay.
The writer teaches sociology at the University College Lahore (UCL). He can be reached at [email protected]
Become a vegan,save the world from global warming and then there are no issues of butchering.
The world is full of ignorant people, the modern world and science is built on Muslim work. If someone think asking for halal meat is causing trouble, then please consider changing your name as they can't pronounce it properly cause them trouble and eventually beliefs if it exists.
It is true that many scientific concepts were built on Muslim work; but where oh where have all those glories gone? All we see now are terrorist bombings, beheadings, violence…show us otherwise then
Religion of peace…will not tatter into pieces. After all they are the true followers. So nothing will happen if hallal is banned.
this has got to take the biscuit. have they banned ‘sharia law’ yet? must have a go at that too, it’s rather fun I’m told.
STEVE JOBS GAVE MANKIND WONDERFUL CREATIONS IN ELECTRONICS…. WHAT MUSLIMS HAVE GIVEN TO THE WEST? Burqa, Hijab, Naqab, Shalwar Qameez, Road blocks for Prayers and of course HALAL GHOSHT. After drinking they insist that Halal Pork be served! Muslims in the West are continously asking for trouble and the trouble will be lashed with full force. …Tariq Khan.
Very well said. I hope there were few more like you, to speak freely, in the religion of piece.
1.Muslims are not ‘giving’ burqa, hijab etc to anyone. They are merely insisting on their right to dress and eat the way they want to. Before you jump on the Muslim bashing band wagon you might want to pause and take a look around. Muslims aren’t the only people in the world who don’t dress like the typical American/Brit who you obviously idolize unconditionally from the depth of your colonized being. Nor are they the only ones who wear head coverings. Christian nuns wear habits remarkably similar to the full body covering worn by some Muslim women which you so obviously disdain. Sikh men wear turbans which is considered an important part of their religion. Many Indian women continue to wear saris while living abroad. The list goes on and on. I suppose you think all these people are ‘asking for trouble’ because they refuse to shed and be ashamed of their religious and cultural identity and refuse to be afflicted with an acute inferiority complex. It is disgraceful that countries masquerading as secular, multi cultural states can’t respect basic personal freedoms.
2.I feel my brain cells dying as I point out that Shalwar Kameez is not an exclusively Muslim dress. It is a South Asian dress worn by many people who are not Muslims. And last I heard they weren’t bullocking western people into wearing them.
3.‘After drinking they insist that Halal Pork be served! ‘ I don’t even understand what you are trying to say here. If the point you are trying to make is that alcohol is forbidden in Islam just like non halal food and yet Muslims choose to consume one while refusing the other then let me remind you that Muslims aren’t the only ones who practice their religion selectively. Very interesting it would be for a secular state to keep a track of how religious a certain group of people are and then base their laws on that!
4.And as for Steve Jobs and your beloved ‘West’ . Not only did they give us ‘wonderful creations in technology’ they also gave us the atomic bomb, Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings etc etc. of course the ‘West’ has accomplished remarkable feats in the field of technology and science amongst others and there is nothing wrong with admiring that. But your servile and brainless boot licking is nauseating!
Tariq Khan asked "STEVE JOBS GAVE MANKIND WONDERFUL CREATIONS IN ELECTRONICS…. WHAT MUSLIMS HAVE GIVEN TO THE WEST?"
Ans: "Steve Jobs", he was originally son of a Syrian moslem studying in the US. Any more questions?
@ naughty pakistani
http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2011/10/11/steve_jobs_father_was_
Steve Jobs considered his adaptive parents his real parents, his biological father had nothing to do with his life. It goes to show that race is unimportant, but it is the Ideology that is. He was not brought up or lead away by his Islamic father who was never involved in his life.
@ Syed Zafar Ali Soharwardy
Keep up the non-sense. All Muslims did was transport intellect between the far east and the West (and built an empire around it, until Europe found effect ways to skip the corrupt middlemen). Muslims have hardly done anything at all for the scientific world, it is a total misconception spread to encourage Muslim propaganda (tell me many of the great things they have done that was not borrowed from greater more civilized areas). A bit like how Crusade was all Europe’s fault when it was Islam itself that had spread via war and destruction in the first place… Do you see a pattern… Lie to your neighbors about peace, then attack them and kill all the males, rape and force marriage (to one male, hence more children) on the females and spread your ideology through force… That is the pattern of Islam and its destruction.
thereligionofpeace.com
I would like to thank the Muslim father of Steve Jobs for the gift of his son to humanity.
Steve Jobs was born to a Muslim father but was raised Christian and died as a strictly vegetarian Buddhist. He did go to India to look for a Hanuman Baba but this Baba had died before he reached there. He probably picked his vegetarian diet fad in India. There is no evidence that he had ever considered Islam as his religion. He was never doubted to be closest Muslim unlike Obama whom many American consider to be a closest Muslim. In fact his Muslim biological father is considered a bad role model for having abandoned him. Why would you give any credit for his biological father as Islam does not allow to father children without Nikah. Just because Steve Jobs is world celebrity, it does not make halal to father children without wedlock and then abandon them. Steve Jobs never reconciled with his biological father during his life time.
Corruption and bribery are very common in many muslim countries. Pakistan, Bangladesh were number one in corruption in the world many years. Pakistanis in Europe and North America are well known for credit card fraud, auto insurance scam and many other low form of crime. Morality is generally very low among Middle eastern peoples also. Financial dishonesty is highest among politicians of muslim countries. But they all eat halal. Can anybody explain why corruption is so high among halal eating peoples?
Its allah's secret wish of banning halal . Sacrifice is when u give something which is yours and not disturbing the nature created by allah .
Comments are closed.