It’s Time to Stop Buying Glatt Kosher Meat
Enough is enough. Cruelty to human beings (in so many forms) at these glatt plants, as well as excessive cruelty to animals, as well as blatant criminal activities, have gone on too long. We in the liberal and traditional-secular Jewish communities never committed to this stringency of “glatt,” and yet, we have been complicit in its expansion, and all the corruption and cruelty that the haredim inevitably bring to every industry they control.
We must call on Hebrew National and other non-haredi meat suppliers to expand their line of offerings. Additionally, we must remember that chicken is pareve. (Note: Empire Kosher apparently does treat its workers okay, and is unionized.)
The haredim do not share our value system. It is time to stop supporting haredi corruption and crime.
It is time to stop buying all glatt products. I personally pledge, although it is difficult, to desist bringing any glatt products into my house. Does anyone else want to join me? Or do you want to continue to support this evil, cruelty, and criminal activities?
When you eat glatt, you enable.
Failed Messiah told The Kvetcher, “In terms of humane treatment of animals, the best slaughter out there is Hebrew National.”
46 comments
Go organic. It’s better for you and for the cows and chickens. There’s not a bit more blood in organically slaughtered meat than kosher slaughtered meat. You’ll have to do the salt treatment yourself but that’s no biggie. Organic meat is grass or vegetarian fed, spend time in pastures, are hormone and chemical free - no feeding them ground up parts of other cows, making them live in a filthy barn their whole lives never seeing the light of day, no sores and infections running rampant from giant agribusiness factory farms. And yes, chicken is pareve. So is turkey.
DK,
I can understand advocating no meat in place of supporting unethical glatt kosher meat suppliers, but it doesn’t make sense to tell people to eat non-glatt kosher meat, or unhekshered chicken (and for the record, many people don’t eat unsupervised fish). You have to give people a solution that is workable for them, and while people might be unwilling to give up meat, eating meat that doesn’t meet their standards of kashrut is not an acceptable option.
Annie,
I wouldn’t say that frum people should stop eating glatt. I would say that secular/liberal people perhaps should.
I’m confused. Do these abusive practices not exist in plants that don’t adhere to glatt standards, or is it that all glatt plants are hareidi, and they tend to treat the animals in this fashion? Is it not just Rabashkin? (I know that all factory farming is abusive, of course; I thought the point has been that Rubashkin is off the charts.)
Chabdnik nephew told me that all kosher meat is glatt today. I wasn’t aware that there were any non-glatt kosher meat producers left. Of course, I’ve been a vegetarian for over thirty years, so it isn’t something of which I’d really take notice.
(Actually, the carnivorous Tibetans knocked me off the wagon about a year ago, and I’ve been struggling to get back on ever since!)
Glatt (except for beef) is a total sham. These days its use is primarily political - a way for Jews who eat glatt everything to say that they’re better Jews than those who don’t eat glatt. Something is either kosher or it’s not.
And even when it comes to beef, just how many unblemished lung animals do you think there are? Especially given the conditions under which most animals intended for kosher slaughter are raised.
Yes! It’s time we stop allowing the Haredim to set the agenda.
Hasoferet, you mean, like glatt chicken?
http://www.oukosher.org/index......_browse/e/
judi….yes or glatt dairy products. Glatt is the Yiddish word for smooth and refers to the lungs of cattle. In order for cattle to be kosher they have to be blemish free, but if the lungs are the only part of the cow with blemishes the animal can still be kosher. Glatt refers to a cow whose lungs are blemish free as well.
I once suggested something similar and one of our visitors recommended the following, available at many Whole Foods stores:
http://www.wiseorganicpastures.com/catalog/
DK–
then the Conservative/Liberal Orthodox movements should get off their dimes and start working on an alternate heksher. We keep hearing about tzedek heksher, but the real issue is that we vote with our wallets. The OU couldn’t exist if the (much larger) number of non-OU but kashrut-observing families went elsewhere for hashgacha.
This is why I try to avoid OU restaurants, or use an alternative heksher.
Also, Glatt kosher chicken is stupid.
We almost exclusively buy Wise organic kosher chicken products, which we can get fresh at Whole Foods or frozen from the neighborhood kosher butcher (the neighborhood butcher’s fresh poultry is all Rubashkin). They’re a little more expensive than Rubashkin or Empire, but we feel much better about buying them and don’t eat meat all that often anyway (we probably break out the meat dishes only a couple times a month). When we can’t find Wise, we’ll go with Empire. We avoid Rubashkin/Aaron’s Best whenever possible.
Annie said
That’s another practice that has no foundation in halacha and is another example of Haredi creep. The fish and other sea items we may not eat is spelled out. A fish is either a kosher species or it’s not. Fish are not subject to slaughtering rituals as are cows, sheep, goats etc. It’s one thing to patronize a fishmonger that sells only kosher fish and quite another to claim that fish require supervision.
Hasoferet,
I disagree. No unsupervised fishmonger sells only kosher fish. By “supervised” I don’t mean the slaughter, I mean the knives, the packaging, etc. If you’re willing to buy a whole fish and clean it yourself, then yeah, go to any fishmonger you want, but otherwise, most people will agree that supervision (of some sort) is required.
Just stop pretending that “outrages” about a selective raid at one kosher processing plan has anything to do with this discussion!
Ron,
As with many things it’s a catalyst for a discussion of larger issues.
I agree with Hasoferet- this is a catalyst for facing larger issues (which we’ll probably conveniently forget about again once the dust settles).
But Ron, the “outrage”, I think, is justified. Just last year, the owners of this “one kosher processing plant” thumbed their noses at the law by declaring that their NYC employees had no right to unionize because they were illegals. In court! Did they think no one in would notice?
Add in the repeated offenses they’ve racked up (detailed at length on other sites) that have kept the EPA and the USDA very busy over the past several years. You know, Chassidus holds that everything happens for a reason…
chicken is parve? what religion is that in?
Mohammed…that’s in Judaism.
1- a chicken is not a mammal and therefore does not have milk for its young so it’s parve, like fish.
2- The reason chicken is considered fleischig goes back to Rabbi Yosi of Galilee who sent his servant to the market to buy meat. The servant didn’t find meat, but he did find fowl (which by the way is NOT the chicken with which we are familiar, but that’s another discussion). Rabbi Yosi decided that since the common man equated fowl with meat that fowl should be considered as meat.
Of course as reason number two is no longer a valid concern, chicken should rightly go back to being parve.
“Judaism”
In orthodox judaism, chicken is fleishig because it says so in shulchan oruch. the shulchan oruch is based on gemoro, an excerpt of which you’re either misquoting or misinterpreting, I’m too lazy to go check out which.
In any case, since you’re obviously talking about a judaism which doesn’t view the shulchan oruch as binding, why don’t you clarify if you mean conservative, reform, karaite, or jews for jesus?
Jews for jesus? G-d forbid!!!!!!!!!
I am neither misquoting nor misinterpreting so you may want to check your own knowledge. Chicken is not fleischig because it says so. It goes back to the Rabbanim 2000+ years ago as I described.
Furthermore the Torah says specifically that fowl is meat, but the fowl to which the Torah refers is NOT chicken.
And you may want to update your knowledge of biology. “Though shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk” refers to animals that produce milk…..mammals. Neither a fowl nor a chicken is a mammal and never they never were.
BTW if anybody is interested in reading about the beginnings of Agri-Processors in Iowa take a look at Postville: A Clash of Cultures in Heartland America by Stephen G. Bloom.
Biology, like history is not Mohammed’s forte.
mohammed, you wrote,
“In any case, since you’re obviously talking about a judaism which doesn’t view the shulchan oruch as binding, why don’t you clarify if you mean conservative, reform, karaite, or jews for jesus?”
Was Judaism before the shulchan aruch — which was, as we know per the author–dictated by an angel (uh huh) — conservative, reform, karaite, or jews for jesus?
Hasoferet,
although, according to my recollection, the Rabbis stipulated that, that particular decision (chicken=meat) be revisited later, as it would not necessarily always be the case that an Am Yisrael could not tell them apart.
Time to revisit it. Chicken Parmesan all around.
Why do you say God forbid?
In what way was jesus worse or different than mendelsohn or mordechai kaplan? just another upgefuhrene yeshiva bochur.
fuck biology. you didn’t answer the question. since your judaism isn’t based on the shulchan oruch, what criterian or parameters are you using to define your judaism? unless you invented a biological judaism when I wasn’t looking.
There’s always someone in the bunch who hijacks a perfectly legitimate and civil discussion by trying to turn it into ‘you’re not really Jewish because…’ or ‘my Judaism is more legit than your Judaism because…’
That said it seems as though English isn’t mohammed’s forte either.
Why not continue the conversation in Yiddish?
mohammed,
The difference between a liberal Judaism such as that of M or MK and that of J4J is that the former is Monotheism and the latter is not quite Monotheistic.
And the difference between the former and say, Islam, is the former rejects the interpretation of your namesake.
hasoferet
getting defensive, or offensive for that matter, still doesn’t answer the question. I didn’t attack your version of judaism, whatever that may be. I asked you to define it. I think that conservative, reform, and jews for jesus are all equally valid forms of jewish expression. But since you’re calling yourself judaism, it’s perfectly reasonable to ask you if you mean one of the established versions, or if you invented your own criteria, what they are.
DK
If you junked the other 612, why fixate on monotheism?
“If you junked the other 612, why fixate on monotheism?”
There are two Judaisms in the Torah, mohammed. There are the 613, and there are the broader guidelines of the eser devarim.
The latter can be accepted on hope, if not quite faith.
mohammed,
I was neither defensive, nor offensive, and I never attacked you. I choose not to answer your question because I choose not to play your game.
I see. complaining that someone is hijacking a discussion, being uncivil, or delegitimizing your viewpoint isn’t being overly defensive. Or offensive.
Neither are snide remarks about the quality of my english.
You chose to answer my question (reply#16) and your answer was one word. Judaism. I asked you to be a little less vague, and after whining and evading, your final answer was you think I’m playing games.
Enjoy the rest of your civil discussion with anyone you choose to answer.
DK
If I see you tonight I’ll continue this discussion in person.
mohammed,
I believe if you re-read your posts #16 and #18 you will see that it was you who went on the offensive when you implied that I don’t know what I’m talking about, assumed that I am not familiar with either the Shulchan Aruch or the Gemara, and had the temerity to delegitimize me as a Jew simply because you don’t agree with what I have said on one particular point.
I stumbled on this post by accident and I am saddened by all the comments. I’m not even going to bother reading any other posts it is really sad to see Jews with such underlying hatred toward each other.
It seems like a number of you are seriously misguided in your view of Judaism and it’s inherent truth/values. Have you consulted with respected Torah authorities on the issues you raise or do you prefer to simply spread malicious information on specific people and groups in general?
What does your Judaism mean to you with so much anger towards other Jews? It seems to me that you really need to research the much larger picture - not just milk/meat/chicken/glatt issue.
Is the Torah true? Is there really a Creator of the universe? Have you spent time studying the texts and investigating the issues of Oral Law and the authority of the Rabbis? Have you visited first hand families who are “chareidi”?
I’m not coming to start another conflict I’m just so sad to see Jews that are obviously proud to be Jewish but seem to be lacking so much information and harboring such deep resentment.
If any of you have any questions or would like more information on the larger picture please feel free to email me.
Judaism has so much meaning to offer but not through angry confrontations and posts denigrating specific sects.
Thanks!
Really? Just what is this larger picture in your view?
My objection to the production of Glatt Kosher meat as well as the phasing out of the practice of Nikkur Achoraim is that it is a breaches the consensus whereby Kosher slaughtering is allowed. The animal welfare lobby has long argued that slaughter without pre-stunning is cruel and should be banned with no exception. This position was accepted by Switzerland, Norway and Sweden where kosher slaughter of cattle is banned. Other countries compromised (sorry to use the C-word, Mohammed) and took the view that whilst pre-stunning was to be made compulsory, an exception should be made for those who keep kosher as not eating pre-stunned meat is a matter of conscience for them. This was an act of generosity by our fellow non Jewish citizens. What must not however be forgotten is that for many of these non Jewish fellow citizens, not eating non-stunned meat is as much a matter of conscience as it is for religious Jews not to eat pre-stunned meat. As Jews we must respect their position if we expect them to respect our position. This means that we must never use our conscience based exception to use non-stunned meats, to introduce such meats into the general non Jewish market especially only for economic reasons. In 1938, the Polish government banned the sale of kosher meat except to Jews. Since it was the practice to sell hind quarters to non-Jews this could have led to meat becoming prohibitively expensive however Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski pushed for the reintroduction of Nikkur Achoraim to overcome this problem.
Despite of what the Haredim tell you, the production of Glatt Kosher is done mainly for economic reasons. It is in the interests of kashrut industry to find fault with animals after slaughter because the more animals that are killed the more schochtim and bodkim are needed and in the unskilled and restricted Haredi employment market, every such job is precious. In non glatt kosher slaughter, to obtain 10 kosher carcases, you would need to slaughter 11 or 12 animals whilst for glatt you need to slaughter 30 to 40 animals! The glatt process results in 15 to 20 times as many non-stunned carcases entering the general market as would otherwise be the case. Together with the reluctance to allow Nikkur Achoraim, this means that for every pound of kosher slaughtered meat that is sold to a Jew, eight or nine pounds is sold to non-Jews. This puts a lie to the claim that we respect others right to avoid non-stunned meats in return for them accepting our right to avoid pre-stunned meats. The non Jewish meat suppliers are happy to keep this dirty little secret as they are supplied with those rejected meats at a discount. If it was to become generally known that the non Jewish population are subsidising the kashut industry by purchasing 80-90% of kosher slaughtered meats in a manner impossible in Israel (despite the recent attempts to increase the non Jewish minority by unconversion), there would be an outcry! For both moral and political reasons we must keep kosher meat out of the general market in accordance with the old consensus even if this means the end glatt production and reintroduction Nikkur Achoraim.
Reb Leibish,
Why is Nikkur Achoraim being phased out? If Nikkur Achoraim can be accomplished then the hindquarters conform with the laws of kashrut, don’t they?
I should have added what are the halachic reasons Nikkur Achoraim would be phased out?
Despite of what the Haredim tell you, the production of Glatt Kosher is done mainly for economic reasons. It is in the interests of kashrut industry to find fault with animals after slaughter because the more animals that are killed the more schochtim and bodkim are needed
Idiocy. Who killed John Kennedy?
And who was responsible for 9/11?
Are you a conspiracy theorist in general or only when it comes to chareidim? Do you believe in the protocols?
mohammed,
Please calm down. This is just a discussion among Jews who are interested in the various aspects of this issue. I’ll bet if you think about it you could probably provide some interesting halachic points of view.
HasSoferet, please see
http://www.kashrut.com/articles/nikkur/
There is no Halachic reason for the phasing out of Nikkur Achoraim only an economic one. The head of the Eda Haredit claimed that there was but he was shown to have ‘misread his source’ (nice term for talking BS).
In order to satisfy the rabbonim (many of whom personally avoided hindquarters meat), nikkur achoraim had to be carried out to such a degree that a cut of meat that had been porged looked as if a dog got to it first . The Jewish housewife (bless her) was not prepared to put such meat before her family and the laws of supply and demand meant that kosher meat suppliers found that hindquarter meat was worth less kosher than non kosher.
Mohammed, it remains a fact the the Glatt process requires the slaughter of 30-40 animals to produce 10 carcasses whilst the non glatt process requires only 12. The extra slaughtering and checking requires the employment of FIVE to SIX times as many shoctim and bodkim as would otherwise be needed. The cost of employing these extra shoctim and bodkim (who strangely happen to be Haredi and would otherwise be unemployable) is subsidized by the non Jewish community which buys 80-90% of kosher slaughtered meat. In effect, the Glatt industry is nothing but an excuse by Haredim to engage in economic dumping. What makes this particularly offensive is that this form of economic dumping undermines not only the non Jews economic interest but takes advantage of a privilege granted by our non Jewish fellow citizens to exempt us from animal welfare laws that they apply to themselves.
We may believe that the non Jews animal welfare policy is wrong headed, however we must respect it and keep non stunned meat out of their market. It is immoral, corrupt and ultimately harmful to our interests to get our fellow non Jewish citizens to largely pay for schecita when we know they generally consider slaughter without pre-stunning to be inhumane even if we do not.
As for who killed Jack Kennedy, apparently R’ Michoel Ber Wiessmandl was told by the Israeli ambassador before Eichmans trial, that Paraguayan Zionists were to blame for this assassination. Look in your copy of the Protocols for full details.
Very enlightening. Thank you.
The head of the Eda Haredit claimed that there was but he was shown to have ‘misread his source’
Which “head”? Who was he shown by? What source? Where? And did he agree that it was a misquote? It’s so easy to make unsubstantiated claims when you’re that vague.
Strangely enough, shochtim and bodkim are chareidi. The shulchan oruch says that a shochet should be a yorei shomayim merabim. How surprising that chareidim don’t consider members of other groups to have met the criteria.
“would otherwise be unemployable” Like half of 47th street, B&H photo, or all the other unemployable chareidim wasting their time in Manhattan.
What do you mean by economic dumping?
How is the non jewish market subsidizing it? Are they paying more for their meat than they would be otherwise?
Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch, Ra’avad of the Edah HaChareidis in Jerusalem claims that Maharshal (Rabbi Shlomo Luria, 1510-1574) established a custom that “Godfearing people refrain from eating hindquarters.” (Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1, YD 418-419). However examining Maharshal in the original clearly shows that Maharshal Maharshal neither refrained from the consumption of hindquarters nor did he prohibit others from consuming them (Yam Shel Shlomo on Chullin 2b, no. 2, p. 2 and Chullin 93b, no. 19, pp. 179-180 in the 5755 edition and cited in full in Be’er HateivYD 65:6).
To answer your point about economic dumping I shall paste a passage from a response by the British Humanist Association to Consultation on the Farm Animal Welfare Council Report on the Welfare of Farmed Animals at Slaughter or Killing.
Begin Quote
It has been suggested that, since the ritual butchering of kosher and halal meat after slaughter is so time-consuming and expensive – forbidden tissues, such as veins, lymph nodes, and the sciatic nerve and its branches have to be removed – only the easiest cuts of meat are so prepared and the remainder, as much as two-thirds of the meat, is sold on the general market. The number of animals slaughtered in pain and distress is therefore up to three times the number needed to provide the market for kosher and halal meat, but to minimize the cost of their religious observance the religious communities pass the additional cost to the extra animals, who pay in their pain and distress, and to the general public, who contrary to their wishes (but in the main unknown to them) support a practice most of them deplore by buying the excess ritually slaughtered meat that the Jewish and Muslim devout choose not to eat.
This is a dishonest system that should be ended immediately. If meat were labelled as ritually slaughtered, sales of it would assuredly go into steep decline. The cost of adhering to their religious scruples would be passed back where it belongs: to the believers, who would be forced either to process and consume or else to discard the excess of ritually slaughtered meat.
13. The Government has proposed consideration of a voluntary scheme for labelling. This is a pusillanimous approach. It is difficult to see how a voluntary scheme could be introduced. Who will press for it? Not the meat trade, nor the retailers, both of whom would see disruption of their market as the inevitable outcome. Nor the public, whose ignorance is a guarantee of inaction. Yet many people are outraged to learn that much of the meat they eat is ritually slaughtered at the cost of pain and distress for the animals. If ritual slaughter is not banned, a mandatory labelling scheme should be introduced without delay.
End Quote
Mohammed, these humamists may be atheists and goyim but they have an unarguable point. In fact they believe that only two thirds of kosher slaughtered meat ends in the general market when in fact it is more like eight ninth! If we refuse to remove such meat from the general market we may find as these humanist desire that kosher slaughter is banned outright as in Sweden, Norway and Switzerland and that will be our fault alone.
You state that the shulchan oruch says that a shochet should be a yorei shomayim merabim. Why do you make it so easy for me.
Glatt production is only intended to provide jobs for the Haredi boys and who cares about what the non Jews think. It is as morally bankrupt as the Haredi attitude to organ transplant donation (We take but we won’t give).
Therefore and despite what the claim to be, the Haredi establishment are not yorei shomayim merabim. That is why the Kvetcher suggests that “It’s Time to Stop Buying Glatt Kosher Meat”. He is such a frummer, he follows the shulchan oruch.
quote”Go organic. It’s better for you and for the cows and chickens. There’s not a bit more blood in organically slaughtered meat than kosher slaughtered meat. You’ll have to do the salt treatment yourself but that’s no biggie. Organic meat is grass or vegetarian fed, spend time in pastures, are hormone and chemical free - no feeding them ground up parts of other cows, making them live in a filthy barn their whole lives never seeing the light of day, no sores and infections running rampant from giant agribusiness factory farms. And yes, chicken is pareve. So is turkey.”
Organic” simply means drug- and chemical-free—organic animals can be subjected to all the same types of cruelty that occur in factory farms, and as long as they are not dosed with drugs or fed food that was treated with pesticides, their meat and milk can be labeled “organic.”Even if they are genuinely drug-free, animals on organic farms are often treated no better than their counterparts in factory farms. Farmers know that the more animals they raise in the least amount of space, the more profitable they will be. Many organic farms cram thousands of animals together in sheds or mud-filled lots, just as factory farms do. Steve Demos, former overseer of the Horizon Organic brand of milk, explains, “There’s a certain idealistic appreciation for a farm with 10 cows grazing on a hill at sunrise. But there are 280 million people in the Unites States. … Long ago they said that small was beautiful; they forgot to tell you it’s not profitable.”8
Animals on organic farms often suffer through the same mutilations that occur in factory farms. Cattle have their horns sawed off and their testicles cut out of their scrotums, and they’re held down and branded with sizzling-hot irons, resulting in third-degree burns. Pigs on organic farms may have their tails chopped off and chunks of their ears cut out—and some have rings put into their noses in order to permanently prevent them from rooting in the grass and dirt, which is one of pigs’ favorite pastimes. Chickens on organic egg farms usually have their beaks burnt off. None of these animals are given any painkillers.
The living conditions of animals on organic farms are often very similar to the conditions in factory farms. Chickens and pigs are often confined to large warehouses that reek of ammonia and rotting excrement. Many organic cows are sent to factory-farm feedlots to be fattened prior to slaughter, where they live in tiny enclosures caked with feces and mud—cows who are fattened on feedlots can still be labeled organic as long as they’re given organic feed.9 Cows on organic dairy farms may be kept in sheds or filthy enclosures, where they spend their lives mired in their own waste, enduring the strain of continuous pregnancies and the theft of their babies. According to an investigative report by Salon.com, some organic dairy companies, such as Horizon Organic, are really factory farms in disguise—the report states that the cows “at one of Horizon’s dairy farms in central Idaho … don’t look too happy. … [E]xperts say that a substantial percentage of cows at [organic] farms like Horizon’s are confined to pens.”10
Farmers may not give medicine to animals who are suffering because the farmer can get a higher price for their meat and milk if the animals retain organic status.11 Studies have found that up to one-third of pigs on some organic farms are suffering from untreated infections, and reports also state that organic pigs often suffer from internal and external parasites, which could be passed on to the people who eat them.12,13 Organic chickens on some farms suffer from higher mortality rates than drugged chickens because extremely crowded and filthy housing conditions can lead to parasites and cannibalism.14 When the udders of cows on organic dairy farms become infected from frequent milkings, many farmers don’t give the cows medicine because then their milk would lose the organic label, which allows the product to be sold at a higher price.
Given these facts, it’s not surprising that the Advertising Standards Authority of the British government has ruled that it is deceptive to claim that animals raised on organic farms enjoy better lives than animals in conventional factory farms.15 The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals testified before a British parliamentary committee, saying, “Organic farming is often perceived as being synonymous with high standards of farm animal welfare. However, this perception … appear[s] to be without foundation.”16 Similarly, a commission funded by the European Union concluded that “a growing body of evidence suggests that the animal health situation on organic farms is no better than that reported in conventional livestock production systems.”
Leave a Comment