EU = Loss of Freedom ?

[john]

Gabriella

You seem to be getting very exited and assuming I am in some way dissing all Muslims, I am not nor would I.

I do not deny for one second that there are areas of animal cruelty in the food chain involving all sorts of people. Aspects of battery farming for instance cause me concern. Usually the driving force is greed or expediency, not ideology.

Comments made here about your's and your daughters attitude show some concern for animal welfare and I applaud you for that.

However you jump down my throat when I suggest that Muslim ritual slaughter is deliberately and unnecessarily cruel, whilst admitting that here in the UK some 12% of Muslims are ideologically driven to behave this way. I suspect your guesstimate is very low and am very certain the figure is very much higher if not absolute in other Muslim areas.

The Pakistani origin men convicted of cruelty and sacrifice in the case I highlighted said they were only doing what was normal in their own country.

By all means campaign for better animal rights across the EU I'll stand with you but take the log from your eyes about where aspects of Muslim ideology lead. 

[ProfessorDavey]

Not sure what the relevance is to a comment on the odds?

On the polling - since April 12th 11 polls have given Leave a lead - with the levels ranging from 2% to 4%.

In the same timeframe 17 polls have given Remain a lead - with the leads ranging from 2% up to 20%. Seven of the Remain poll leads have been 10% or more, obviously none of the Leave leads have come close to that level.

[Jack Knave]

L.A.

Ask the French about loss of freedoms with regards to the new Labour laws there. These laws have already been implemented in the southern member states and is EU/EZ policy. So much for Corbyn and co. going on about if we stay in the EU the employers rights will be upheld!

[jeremyp]

Ask the French about loss of freedoms with regards to the new Labour laws there.

These have nothing to do with the EU.

The French labour laws have been absolutely crazy for many years. It's almost impossible to make an employee redundant in France without paying punitive compensation (a year's salary IIRC). If you know you can't lay people off in periods of slack demand, you don't hire them in first place.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella

You seem to be getting very exited and assuming I am in some way dissing all Muslims, I am not nor would I.

I do not deny for one second that there are areas of animal cruelty in the food chain involving all sorts of people. Aspects of battery farming for instance cause me concern. Usually the driving force is greed or expediency, not ideology.

If correcting inaccurate statements and half-truths is your definition of "getting very excited" then clearly most posters on here must get very excited according to you. Let's hope you can cope with all this excitement.

Are you saying that the belief that profits are more important than animal suffering, is a more morally acceptable position to you than putting religious belief above animal suffering? Why? Because you can relate to greed but not gods?

Comments made here about your's and your daughters attitude show some concern for animal welfare and I applaud you for that.

However you jump down my throat when I suggest that Muslim ritual slaughter is deliberately and unnecessarily cruel, whilst admitting that here in the UK some 12% of Muslims are ideologically driven to behave this way. I suspect your guesstimate is very low and am very certain the figure is very much higher if not absolute in other Muslim areas.

Let me correct you again - what you meant to say was ritual slaughter by a small percentage of Muslims in the UK is deliberately and unnecessarily cruel according to the BVA and the RSPCA and quite a lot of Muslims who buy pre-stunned halal meat. That 12% estimate of no stunning is not my guess - that was the estimated figure that the RSPCA investigations have come up with.

Why don't you take the results of your investigations to the RSPCA and report back when the RSPCA have revised their figures to match yours. Given how certain you are I am sure you must have some credible evidence that the RSPCA estimate of 12% is wrong. If your investigation is correct, it might help bring about legislation that bans slaughter without stunning, no exceptions.

To help you appear more credible to the RSPCA you probably need to be aware that there is a different halal certificate for non-stun halal met. The halal certificate is displayed on the wall behind the counter in most halal butchers I have visited. For example a halal butcher who displays a certificate in his shop from the Halal Monitoring Committee (HMC) means that the meat he is selling comes from animals that have not been stunned before slaughter  - part of the 12%. The HMC justification is they want to ensure the animal was alive when slaughtered rather than accidentally killed during stunning.

If a halal butcher displays a certificate from say the Halal Food Authority (HFA) - the animal has been stunned - part of the 88%. The HFA says that animals are checked during slaughter - because halal slaughter is by hand and not mechanically done - and if found to be dead rather than stunned before the animal's throat is cut, the meat from that animal is not certified as halal.

This difference of opinion amongst Muslims is just one of many that crop up due to differing interpretations of the various different Muslim ideologies. Bit like if you disagreed with your friend about whether people have a moral duty to pay more tax than they are legally obliged to pay e.g. by not opening a Ltd company and paying corporation tax but only ever operating as a sole trader and paying income tax, which is set at a much higher rate than corporation tax.

So currently I am "very excitedly" pointing out to you that your disbelief in my daughter.s ability to choose to eat stunned halal meat was incorrect, based on the fact that we can clearly see which agency certified the butcher.

Which bit was me "jumping down your throat"? Was it when I corrected your inaccurate opinions about non-halal slaughter by letting you know that non-halal slaughter also involves hoisting an animal up and allowing it to bleed?

Being corrected by posters is a normal part of the debate process on this forum - everyone does it to everyone else - so please expect to have people "jump down your throat" on here if you plan to continue posting.

The Pakistani origin men convicted of cruelty and sacrifice in the case I highlighted said they were only doing what was normal in their own country.

Ok but what a few Pakistani men in Britain said isn't really relevant to my daughter. So not sure why you used them as an example to suggest that my daughter was strange or would approve of what these Pakistani men did.

By all means campaign for better animal rights across the EU I'll stand with you but take the log from your eyes about where aspects of Muslim ideology lead.

What log? I said organisations like the RSPCA say 12% of animals killed in the halal manner aren't stunned and my daughter prefers to eat halal meat where the animal has been stunned, so she disagrees with the Muslims who support the non-stun method. She is part of the majority of Muslims in the UK who consume meat from stunned animals - the 88%.

Are you saying the Muslim ideology that permits stunning is leading to something that I should be worried about?

By the way, the EU says all animals should be stunned before slaughter but allows a religious exemption to this rule. The British laws also allow this exemption, whereas EU countries such as Denmark and Sweden have ignored the EU exemption for religious reasons and have banned all non-stun slaughter. It's up to British people to successfully campaign for a change in the law here too - 88% of halal slaughter houses already comply with the requirement to stun so should be easy to get majority support for this proposal amongst Muslims and non-Muslims.

[Nearly Sane]

Applause to Gabriella, just too 'excited' to post more

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Applause to Gabriella, just too 'excited' to post more

Haha - thank you NS. Yes we're an excitable bunch on here - but no Wild West....yet   

[Jack Knave]

These have nothing to do with the EU.

The French labour laws have been absolutely crazy for many years. It's almost impossible to make an employee redundant in France without paying punitive compensation (a year's salary IIRC). If you know you can't lay people off in periods of slack demand, you don't hire them in first place.

Of course they are EU instigated. It may not be above the waterline law but it is from pressure from Brussels. As I said the same thing has been done in the southern states, all from pressure from the EU.

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course they are EU instigated. It may not be above the waterline law but it is from pressure from Brussels. As I said the same thing has been done in the southern states, all from pressure from the EU.

Rubbish - if this is EU driven then it would apply throughout the EU - it doesn't - it is home grown French bureaucracy. Just as the stifling regulations on UK employers to 'prove' their 'employees' (including UK citizens giving a non paid one hour lecture - the same one they have given for the last 15 years) are entitled to work in the UK. This means every year our guest lecturer must bring their passport, a member of our HR team must take their passport, take a copy themselves, and fill out a form which the guest lecturer must sign to allow them to give their lecture (where they are giving their time free of charge). And having done that once (remember they are a UK citizen) the UK government won't accept that the next year, another copy of the passport must be taken, another form filled out.

Perhaps not onerous for most people but when your organisation benefits from dozens of experts prepared to give their time and expertise for free as guest lecturers it becomes a major bureaucratic issue.

Of and this is entirely from the UK government - nothing to do with the EU - indeed my colleagues from other EU countries are astonished at this red tape as they have nothing like it.

[jeremyp]

Of course they are EU instigated.

No.

They.

Are.

Not.

It may not be above the waterline law but it is from pressure from Brussels. As I said the same thing has been done in the southern states, all from pressure from the EU.

You are talking bollocks.

[Jack Knave]

Rubbish - if this is EU driven then it would apply throughout the EU - it doesn't - it is home grown French bureaucracy. Just as the stifling regulations on UK employers to 'prove' their 'employees' (including UK citizens giving a non paid one hour lecture - the same one they have given for the last 15 years) are entitled to work in the UK. This means every year our guest lecturer must bring their passport, a member of our HR team must take their passport, take a copy themselves, and fill out a form which the guest lecturer must sign to allow them to give their lecture (where they are giving their time free of charge). And having done that once (remember they are a UK citizen) the UK government won't accept that the next year, another copy of the passport must be taken, another form filled out.

Perhaps not onerous for most people but when your organisation benefits from dozens of experts prepared to give their time and expertise for free as guest lecturers it becomes a major bureaucratic issue.

Of and this is entirely from the UK government - nothing to do with the EU - indeed my colleagues from other EU countries are astonished at this red tape as they have nothing like it.

Similar labour laws have been implemented in the southern states so that they can reach their 3% deficit targets but this isn't necessary as this austerity is to ensure that the banks don't take a hit - the real rulers of the EU. All it needs is a write down of their debts and such mean austerity can be left on the shelf.

[Jack Knave]

No.

They.

Are.

Not.

You are talking bollocks.

Your assertions prove nothing.....and THAT'S NOT NICE !!!! 

[Sassy]

Whereas the Express's headline about 12 million Turks wanting to come here are not scare tactics - but pure factual reporting 

You don't find that alarming? But the truth is the EU has already meant that holiday prices are already too high.
The cost of housing is already up and down. Our own people on the street. Our own people dying because they have closed accident and emergency departments so people have to travel further. Selling off whole hospitals eventually to sell land for houses. Private houses.

What he is threatening us with has already become a reality people are dying because of the changes. People cannot afford to buy new homes. People cannot afford to live let alone go abroad for a holiday.

You know the true ignorance don't you... That when the Government mention what a family on benefits get, they include the rent and council tax. So the lump sum is not actually what they receive to live on.
When a person received £57.90 per week.
Age   JSA weekly amount
18 to 24   up to £57.90
25 or over   up to £73.10
Couples (both aged over 18)   up to £114.85

That amount has to cover gas, electricity, water rates, food,  and any other charges including looking for work and busfares to interviews.
A single person is allowed £350 per month to rent a home.
You know anyone who can live on £57.90 per week? Or where they can rent a home with one bedroom for £350 per calendar month.

Just imagine how those full of pride believe like Jeremy Kyle that their tax pays for these people. In denial of the truth that God created everything and if he suddenly decided to remove all the animals and kill the crops that man would have absolutely nothing to live on.

A piece of bread could buy a bag of gold...


Truth is they always select a large family whose benefit runs into literal thousands because they need more rooms and are feeding more mouths.
What they don't seem to understand is this:-  If you pay a single person a small amount and they cannot afford to live then having children they really do not want is a step to make ends meet rather than live on the street till they find work.

In this day and age no person should be homeless or without an income.
If they work the wages are too low to cover rent and living costs.
They are in a no win situation already. However the reason they will fail is this:-


Proverbs 22:22-23
Do not rob the poor because he is poor, Or crush the afflicted at the gate; For the LORD will plead their case And take the life of those who rob them.

Zechariah 7:10
and do not oppress the widow or the orphan, the stranger or the poor; and do not devise evil in your hearts against one another.'

Psalm 72:4
May he vindicate the afflicted of the people, Save the children of the needy And crush the oppressor.

Isaiah 10:1-3
Woe to those who enact evil statutes And to those who constantly record unjust decisions, So as to deprive the needy of justice And rob the poor of My people of their rights, So that widows may be their spoil And that they may plunder the orphans. Now what will you do in the day of punishment, And in the devastation which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help? And where will you leave your wealth?

Proverbs 17:5
He who mocks the poor taunts his Maker; He who rejoices at calamity will not go unpunished.

Amos 5:11
Therefore because you impose heavy rent on the poor And exact a tribute of grain from them, Though you have built houses of well-hewn stone, Yet you will not live in them; You have planted pleasant vineyards, yet you will not drink their wine.

Psalm 146:7-9
Who executes justice for the oppressed; Who gives food to the hungry The LORD sets the prisoners free. The LORD opens the eyes of the blind; The LORD raises up those who are bowed down; The LORD loves the righteous; The LORD protects the strangers; He supports the fatherless and the widow, But He thwarts the way of the wicked.




What our Government and others are doing can only end in disaster.
They oppress the poor and to leave people dying on our streets is the worst thing they could do for our people.

Everyone has their own point of view. No human being was born with more right than another to have food to live and a place of shelter. No amount of mans thinking will change the fact they never could earn a right to food of the land above another.

If the Government and those with money can climb over the needy crushing them to get to a place of power.
Then when they are gone there is nothing to have power over and their money becomes useless.

It isn't the poor or needy who bring this country down. It is the greedy and selfish who truly believe they somehow have more right than those less fortunate.

Love they neighbour makes you want to laugh when you see our Government the puppet of other Countries.

[jeremyp]

Your assertions prove nothing.....and THAT'S NOT NICE !!!! 

It proves that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Shaker]

Somebody says what many of us are thinking - both Leave and Remain campaigns are full of the brown stuff and pulling figures, predictions and prognostications out of thin air: http://goo.gl/LTo83Z

[Jack Knave]

It proves that you have no idea what you are talking about.

If that is your definition of proof then I can see why you live in your fantasy world as the theists do!!!