Following on from Chris’s post on the ethics of ritual slaughter, I thought I’d put up a link to one of the best things I read last year in the Guardian, on the ins and outs of the Halal meat industry. Suffice it to say that the definition of “Halal”, as with so many regulatory issues in the food industry, is a somewhat fluid concept, subject to the same sorts fo industry lobbying and regulatory capture as any other (reading between the lines, I pick up that the real problem for the halal industry is that if you don’t stun animals before slaughter, then they tend to kick around a bit, damaging the meat and leading to wastage costs which cannot always be passed on to the consumer).
Suffice it to say that if you really believe that it is a grave sin for you to eat meat which was not killed in the precise manner prevalent in Mecca around 622 CE, then it is probably not a good idea to go shopping for stuff branded “Halal” in the UK. It looks to me as if vegetarianism is the only religiously safe option for fundamentalist Muslims in the UK. For non-fundamentalists who understand that the strict traditional approach is not consistent with the realities of a modern abbattoir, then surely there can be no principled objection to starting up a debate about what compromises can reasonably be expected between religion and animal welfare.
I have no comparable information easily accessible online about the Kosher meat industry, but kosher/non-kosher scandals are a staple of the North London local press, so I would guess that similar arguments go through …
In the States, this tends to create “Establishment Clause” problems. Ideally, the FDA ought to get together some reasonably representative set of rabbis or imams and hash out just what qualifies as kosher and halal to them, then allow those who meet those halal standards to affix appropriate labels. Falsely affixing such a label is, then, fraud and federally prosecutable. Not everybody would agree to those standards, but then they can have their own super-strict halal and kosher labels and purchase appropriately. Such a system would still presumably serve the bulk of Jewish and Muslim consumers and would create a reasonably enforceable legal framework for monitoring compliance.
The trouble is that considering the fuss over organic standards, I’m sure somebody would claim such a move is tantamount to state establishment of a religion.
Somebody (the New York State Court of Appeals) already has.
(Found with an assist from Eugene Volokh, who agrees with the court.)
The problem is that there is no single definition of “kosher” in a fractured religion (some consider “hard cheeses” kosher, some don’t. Recently, without any forewarning, the entire religion up and decided that corn syrup was kosher for passover, leading to the importation of soft drinks into the KFP aisles.) The solution is obvious, and it is generally what is done in America.
Different religious groups create a “mark” that they will allow to be placed on items that they consider to be kosher. (The “OU”, the “K”, etc.)
That way, the consumer, rather than the government, gets to decide what “kosher” means. If some group wants to trademark a pig symbol and mark their product as “kosher pork — look for the sign of the pig!” that’s perfectly legal. People who want to keep kosher will just have to decide whether to trust that symbol or not. Most won’t.
I don’t see why halal should be any more difficult to enforce without getting the government involved in religious interpretations.
Complicated in the UK because if the UK government were to get involved in certifying halal meat it would almost certainly open itself up to massive legal action under the treaty of Rome from Dutch producers of “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Halal!”.
Mrs Tilton - why am I not surprised that someone’s been through this in US court?
I realise I’m pretty atypical for thinking that it’s okay for the state to take reasonable and good faith measures to protect consumers’ desire to buy products with qualities that I think they are silly to care about. I could agree why with that particular ruling because the law was so terribly vague about what qualifies as kosher. If it had said “orthodox Hebrew practice as described in section [blah]:[blah][blah] of the New York commercial code” I would have been quite okay with a ruling in the opposite direction.
Matt - consider a comparable case involving less religious concerns: “orange juice.” US law says that if something is labelled orange “juice” it must in fact be at least a particular percentage orange juice (50% or equivalent in concentrate, IIRC). If this was a matter of private labelling, it might say “certified as pure orange juice by the Association of New Jersey Food Additive Manufactures - contains grapefruit juice and artifical flavours.” How many consumers look at the side of the carton? Do people have the right to have certain expectations when they see labels on food, or should they have to read the fine print every time?
There are a few people who will only buy orange juice that is not made from concentrate and has no added sugar, but most of us don’t care. But there are few people who are happy to buy pre-mixed Tang labelled “orange juice.” If the law correlates reasonably well to people’s expectations, it’s working reasonably well. It would seem to me that the same case could be made for kosher and halal.
D^2 - I hadn’t even thought about the EU’s interest in labelling. BTW, you’ve been watching the Vicar of Dibley lately, haven’t you? “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Jesus”?
Scott,
If it had said “orthodox Hebrew practice as described in section [blah]:[blah][blah] of the New York commercial code” I would have been quite okay with a ruling in the opposite direction.
I’m not certain that would work, constitution-wise. I don’t think the legislature of New York would pass muster if it set about defining what constitutes ‘orthodox Hebrew practice’ (not even if we construe ‘orthodox’ here as including all the wide array of practices and standards that may commonly be found within Judaism, i.e., not (only) orthodox).
No secular legal authority can, or should, worry about assuring observers of kashrut that the things they buy are in fact kosher. (Indeed, no single Jewish legal authority can assure all such observers that what they buy is kosher. I am reminded of the old Jewish joke in which Moses goes to heaven, where he is invited to dinner by the Lord Himself. After hesitating a moment, Moses says, ‘I’ll just take the fruit cup…’)
The thing to do, I think (and I also think this is what is very often done) is for the various streams within Judaism to establish bodies to judge whether a particular item is kosher. Any food producer could apply to a board (or any number of them) and, upon satsifying the board, be authorised to carry the board’s seal of approval on its label. Any Jew who cared about kashrut could decide which board he trusted (‘Kashrut Front of Judaea: carve me a slice; Judaean Kashrut Front: I’ll stick with the fruit cup’). And any producer who used a board’s seal without authorisation could be held liable, on purely secular grounds, without the secular authorities having to consult the Talmud. Exactly the same system, mutatis mutandis, could be used by Muslims with respect to halal meats. But if I (to continue with Matt’s amusing example) market ‘kosher pork sausages’ without usurping a board’s seal, I may be accused of making an offensive joke, or of having a shockingly poor grasp of Jewish dietary laws; but I should not be accused by the State of New York of fraud.
What’s the betting that genetic modification can create a kosher pig?
(and how did I know it would only take a second to find out whether this question had been adressed?)
Here is New Jersey’s Halal food disclosure rule. NJ was first in the nation with this, but all these laws are modelled on state kosher laws.
There’s already a mule-foot pig (no cloven hoof) but it doesn’t chew the cud, and that would be hard to engineer since it presupposes a whole different digestive system.
Jews, Muslims, Christians, Zoroastrians, and Manichaeans all came to China at about the same time (ca. 500-800 A.D.) and from the same place (Persia). I believe they distinguished Zoroastrians from the others (they died out quickly anyway), but they didn’t care much about the differences between the other ridiculous groups, which they tended to lump. (They aren’t clear today that Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons ultimately belong under the same “Christian” umbrella).
Anyway, the difference between kosher and halal is a certain tendon, so either Muslims or Jews have been described by the Chinese as “tendon-eaters”. Christians eat pork but not dog. Manichaeans were vegetarians and eventually were absorbed by Buddhism; their religion favored eating melons.
In Christian history, converts were forbidden to eat horse meat. In Christianity, Judaism, and Buddhism, dietary prohibitions were were a way of dissociating from religions of sacrifice and (except for Buddhists) idol worship. Often notions of purity are also involved, including bathing, avoidance of dogs, avoidance of garlic and onions, etc.
Mongol practice required that slaughtering be done without spilling blood. Animals were slaughtered by making an incision, reaching in, grabbing the heart, and squeezing it until the animal died. Attempts to enforce this practice on Muslims were resented for some reason.
Realizing that it’s an error to apply humanocentric values to non-human creatures: were it me, I would argue that the most humane practice would be not to slaughter me at all, with questions of method being quite secondary. That may be linear, left-brain thinking, though.
The whole halal/kosher story reminds me of something I heard from an Ultra-Orthodox guy I used to work with.
Apparently in the Sydney food industry, a particular rabbi and imam in charge of certifying places as halal and/or kosher used to visit jointly, as that meant disrupting production only once. They worked together for many years, and very occasionally, due to sickness and so on, when only one of them could make the visit, he fill in the appropriate checklist for the other, and then take it to the home of the other for it to be signed.
Apparently, this never caused a problem …
This practice is actually quite normal, but it’s asymmetric. “Halal” meat is usually also kosher (because it’s been kept separate from pork etc and slaughtered in an acceptable way) but “kosher” meat is not usually halal (because it hasn’t been slaughtered by a Muslim while reciting a prayer).
For this reason, most “kosher” meat that you see in shops comes from the local halal slaughterhouse. Unless you live in Israel I suppose.
Dsquared — I think you’ll find that view on the “permissibility” of kosher meat consumption for Muslim varies. Some will say Kosher meant is ‘zabiha’ à(slaughtered int he appropriate way) and is halal (permissable). Others disagree.
I think that 20 years ago, Kosher meat was more accepted among Muslims in Christian countries, as the Halal (Zabiha) meat industry was in its infancy. For political, business competition, ethnic and religious reasons, kosher meat is falling out of favour among Muslims (at least Muslims in the US. I don’t know about the UK).
My understanding was that the generally accepted view among Muslim jurists is that a Muslim may eat meat certified as kosher if no halal meat is available.
I imagine observant Jews would be quite upset to learn that the ‘kosher’ meat they were eating came from a halal slaughterhouse (unless, as seems unlikely, all the slaughtering was carried out by a schochet). I don’t think observant Jews consider halal meat to be, well, quite kosher. It may be, though this is sheer speculation on my part, that rabbinic authorities would view eating halal meat as permissible b’diaved; that is to say, if you find out afterwards that the meat you’ve eaten was halal rather than kosher, you have committed no transgression - but you’re not permitted knowingly to accept halal as a substitute for kosher.
As I am neither an imam nor a rabbi, of course, none of the above has any value whatever as religious jurisprudence.
So, then, who are the “tendon-eaters”?
There is a halal form of Chinese cuisine, which would also be kosher, and which would solve a lot of problems for Orthodox Jews in NYC ordering take-out.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review