kdsingh80 Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) http://thelangarhall.com/general/halaltaboo/ It looks to me that in another 50 year 100s of new version of sikhism are going to come .The followers of Sikhism unlike Muslims are interested in creating new versions of Sikhism rather than following the older version, by introducing their own thinking.If something that is not inline with their thinking then that should not part of Sikhism and for this we have Gurbani,saakhiyaan ,sikh history and anything related to sikhism to justify their views. Edited February 22, 2011 by kdsingh80 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xylitol Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 the lengths that people will go to justify their own mann-marjee never ceases to amaze me... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 The guy's an idiot, why write about Sikhi if you haven't a clue? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 What is the reason Sikh's cant eat halal? As far as I've read, the animal dies instantly so there is no case of the animal suffering unnecessary which most Sikhs will say is the case 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest zulu Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 What is the reason Sikh's cant eat halal? As far as I've read, the animal dies instantly so there is no case of the animal suffering unnecessary which most Sikhs will say is the case Read the comments on the link....one guy explained why, also there are plently of rehitnameh dating back to 18th C say to stay away from halal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 yeah i know but im mostly interested in the reason why. ok i'll take a look 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted February 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Sikhchic also published roundtable conference on this topic http://www.sikhchic.com/roundtable/why_no_halal_for_sikhs_the_roundtable_open_forum_61 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 I've seen it being done, and the animal doen't die instantly. It's a slow, painful death and they have to hold the mouth of the animal shut until it finally dies to keep it quiet. It's literally bled to death. The Islamic Kalaams that they read won't do you any favours either if you're not a Muslim...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 I've seen it being done, and the animal doen't die instantly. It's a slow, painful death and they have to hold the mouth of the animal shut until it finally dies to keep it quiet. It's literally bled to death. The animal dies instantly while the body continues to cramp. Like when you behead a chicken and it keeps running afterwards, though it is dead... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 The animal dies instantly while the body continues to cramp. Like when you behead a chicken and it keeps running afterwards, though it is dead... That is just Islamic propaganda. Since animals do not have the facial expressions or speech with which they can communicate their pain, we think they don't feel any pain. I've seen how Muslims behead people in their hostage videos and it is exactly the same way they Halal the animals. Judging from those human execution videos and the way the human screams and yells in pain, it is reasonable and logical to assume that the animal must feel the exact same amount of pain when it is being killed by the Muslims. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Would'n a person die instantly if you cut his carotid artery??? sure he would.. same thing in halal slaughtering... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Cutting arteries wont kill you instantly lol, it will make you bleed to death. If you dont want an animal to suffer, cut the nerves linked to its main nerve centre. Decapitation usually does this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaikaara Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 refer to www.degtegfateh.0catch.com there are videos of chatka and halal and a lot of info 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xylitol Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Would'n a person die instantly if you cut his carotid artery??? sure he would.. same thing in halal slaughtering... Watch the video of the journalist who was beheaded using the halal method... After you hear his screams let me know if you still think that the halal method of slaughter is humane. It's time to wake up from the shackles of liberalism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 (edited) Would'n a person die instantly if you cut his carotid artery??? sure he would.. same thing in halal slaughtering... NO, cutting an artery will cause the animal to bleed(suffer) to death not kill it instantly. Even though, I'm not much in favour of Jhatka either, but only Jhatka can be considered to be the most painless and instant method of slaughter since the nerves are cut that moment. Muslims of course will want us to blindly believe all sorts of non sense like Islam being the religion of peace, Prophet Mohammad being mercy to mankind, Islam means freedom for women, dhimmis and Halal being a painless method of slaughter which is all false. Edited February 24, 2011 by Mithar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyhp32 Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 What does surprise me is that some Sikhs are all too ready to accept some simplistic Islamic explanations of why Muslims do certain things but want a thesis in order to accept why they as Sikhs should do or not do certain things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 http://thelangarhall.com/general/halaltaboo/ It looks to me that in another 50 year 100s of new version of sikhism are going to come .The followers of Sikhism unlike Muslims are interested in creating new versions of Sikhism rather than following the older version, by introducing their own thinking.If something that is not inline with their thinking then that should not part of Sikhism and for this we have Gurbani,saakhiyaan ,sikh history and anything related to sikhism to justify their views. Hmmm this guy does not seem to understand that Halal is part and parcel of Conversion to Islam. Next he'll argue praying 5 times a day to Mecca isn't a bad thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 NO, cutting an artery will cause the animal to bleed(suffer) to death not kill it instantly. Even though, I'm not much in favour of Jhatka either, but only Jhatka can be considered to be the most painless and instant method of slaughter since the nerves are cut that moment. Muslims of course will want us to blindly believe all sorts of non sense like Islam being the religion of peace, Prophet Mohammad being mercy to mankind, Islam means freedom for women, dhimmis and Halal being a painless method of slaughter which is all false. Note also, Jhatka, or One blow is a Martial technique, just like the Samurai, so Jhatka has more of a significance in this respect. Cutting an artery is hardly Martial. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted March 3, 2011 Report Share Posted March 3, 2011 Stay on topic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekmusafir_ajnabi Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 http://thelangarhall.com/general/halaltaboo/ It looks to me that in another 50 year 100s of new version of sikhism are going to come .The followers of Sikhism unlike Muslims are interested in creating new versions of Sikhism rather than following the older version, by introducing their own thinking.If something that is not inline with their thinking then that should not part of Sikhism and for this we have Gurbani,saakhiyaan ,sikh history and anything related to sikhism to justify their views. KDSingh80 - You need not wait 50-100 years for a new version. You have it now at Sikh Philosophy Network where new Sikhism has already taken birth. This version can be termed as Jat-Sikhism or Akali-Sikhism. This is when something is beyond ones understanding, you give it a new meaning. - Congratulations SPN. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekmusafir_ajnabi Posted March 9, 2011 Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 Note also, Jhatka, or One blow is a Martial technique, just like the Samurai, so Jhatka has more of a significance in this respect. Cutting an artery is hardly Martial. Killing a defenceless animal is hardly martial either. Call your self a Lion and Kill Goats. Try facing a real Lion. Singh soormein chadde shikaar Makhi gheri vich bazaar Mari nahi par Langdi Keeni Singh Soormein Bahadri Kinni. This is your view of being Martial. Randip singh - let me know if you need an interpretation of this into english. - LOL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted March 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2011 KDSingh80 - You need not wait 50-100 years for a new version. You have it now at Sikh Philosophy Network where new Sikhism has already taken birth. This version can be termed as Jat-Sikhism or Akali-Sikhism. This is when something is beyond ones understanding, you give it a new meaning. - Congratulations SPN. I am also watching birth of ekmusafir ajnabi sect of Sikhism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2011 http://thelangarhall.com/human-rights/longing-for-home/#comments TLH at its best again.In comments section their administrators openly support Hamas and Palestine .I don't understand what is wrong with some sikhs.Has anybody ever seen an arabic or even Budhist website supporting Khalistan but some sikhs keep poking their noses in others affairs as a result they get kicks from both sides 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 Read up on the history of Israel. Just a note: many Sikhs have helped, and continue to help wherever there are problems in the world. Most choose to stay gupt though. If you want to help, let me know. If you want to discuss Palestine further, please open a new topic. As you are the moderator of this site please create separate thread and shift relevant posts 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=14130&pid=123869&st=0&#entry123869 Another thread is created to discuss Israel Palestine conflict if anyone wants to reply to any post then please reply in that thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.