WMy father arrived in the Great Britain in late 1950s to work on the eastern London ports, partly early wave of Bangladeshi who came after World War II, there was no halal meat, so he went without age. Halal meat refers to the meat prepared according to the Islamic law, which requires quick cutting to the throat while calling for God’s name as part of religious compliance.
He first calmed down in the tower hamlets – a way of crumpling and strenuous, low-paid workforce – where he and other men from Silheta occasionally buy slaughter chickens, after Halal principles. In these small, overpowering apartments, they also cooked and eaten – not only to support, but to preserve their dignity, faith and fragile feeling home in unknown land.
The parliament will discuss public pray on Monday to ban the massive slaughter. Framed as a question of animal welfare, a petition raises a deeper question about the cultural reason of Muslim and Jewish communities in Britain. Jewish food law, or KashrutIncludes Shechita – The slaughter method that also prohibits stunning. The use of words of words such as “barbarian” and appeals made of “modern British values” suggest that certain minorities are incompatible with national identity – and effectively challenges both halal and kosher practice.
The Islam teaches us by treating animals with compassion and care. The Islamic law determines clear guidelines for ensuring that the animals are not exposed to unnecessary suffering, even at the scene of slaughter.
For centuries, through cultures and faith, the animals have provided food, clothing, transportation, protection and emotional socializing. This shared history carries a joint responsibility.
However, in February 2024. years, the European Court of Human Rights supported a Banning a ritual massacre in Belgiumconcluding that he did not violate Article 9 of the Convention. The Court claimed that “Public Morality” include concerns about the environment of individuals – and overtime, animals.
But whose morality are supported? And in what costs for religious freedom?
That decision reflected not moral neutrality, but the hierarchy of value, one in which cultural majority define what is counted as acceptable, and minorities are expected to be replaced.
This narrative of exclusion is viewed on how the British norms around food, tradition and necessity are designed history and circumstances.
In the 1980s, when my brothers and sisters wondered if we could get a pet, my father laughed. Shall we eat and eat? He said – half a joke, half of the memory. For him, rabbits meant a necessity, not feel.
During and after World War II, rabbit meat was a British diet. In places like East London, the yard hutches was not for pets, but for the pot. She was ordinary, practical – unquestionably British. Such practices were not demonized; They were seen as reasonable.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA), Great Britain Regulator for food and hygiene safety, monitors in accordance with all slaughterhouses, hallal and non-haillal. In its 2023-24 report, the FSA recorded 362 violations of animal welfare regulations, but does not specify whether these offenses occurred in Halal certified or main facilities. Since approximately 88 percent of the animals were sheltered for Halal consumption in the UK – and that only a small number of undemiled halas and kosher slaughterhouses remain in the paper, it is statistically likely to appear in the main slaughterhouses in the main slaughterhouses.
However, halal practices continue to face disproportionate supervision, although the demonstration of life that supports government has shown that the unusual Halal slaughter can meet established standards of social protection. It was founded in 2021. With the support of the parliamentary group of versatile for animal benefits, the scheme that supports the industry and is in the UK and abroad, so that the electric head is only amazing sheep and goats in accordance with the principles of Halal Slaughter.
The ban on the massacre that is discussed through this petition reflects the broader trend of supervision that targets Muslim life in Britain. Muslim practices are long treated with suspicion under the guise of liberal concern, either in discussions about the hall of the Hall, Burk or Sharia law. The recent example came on Wednesday, when the MP Sarah Pochin was challenged by Sir Keir Starmer to say if he would support the prohibition of persons and the body that was carried by some Muslim women, such as France, Denmark and Belgium.
Sets the urgent question: whose values are protected and why do minorities have to constantly justify theirs?
Ultimately, the question is not whether to ban the massacre that did not induce, but as we can support the benefits of animals and religious freedom – without minority communities.