Rabbi Shafran Responds to PETA

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Shmarya says:

    1. The second cut in the PETA video was done with a hook by a non-Jewish worker. The second cut done for Patty Judge was done by a shochet with a chalaf.

    2. If the shochtim Dr. Levinger saw made deep rather than shallow cuts, and that is reported to be the case, then those cuts would have severed the carotids and rendered the animal unconscious faster than a the shallow cuts seen on the PETA video.

    3. I’ll check the Vogue quote. If your representation of it is inaccurate, I’ll ask the Noviminsker, shelita, to have a discussion with you on the importance of truth.

  2. Yaakov Menken says:

    1 & 2 need no response. Every neutral expert from Temple Grandin to other Kashrus agencies said doing the trachea pull so quickly could be a problem, and Rubashkin has already changed its practice in response.

    3. I asked Rabbi Shafran about that, specifically the idea that Vogue might have misquoted her:

    When Ms. Newkirk provides an admission from the writer of the piece that the PETA founder was misquoted, I will accept that contention. Until then, the quote, which is quite clear and specific (and was, incidentally, repeated — in the context of rights, not pain — in the Washington Times, on August 29, 1999), remains a concise and accurate representation of what she and others at PETA truly believe. There are many less pithy but equally telling quotes from Ms. N. — like her response to a question about whether she would oppose experiments on rats if it would cure AIDS. She said (New Yorker, April 14, 2003), “Would you be opposed to experiments on your daughter if you knew it would save fifty million people?” Needless to say, that (and many other quotes on record) implies precisely the moral equivalence I cited.

    Someone wise once said “A ‘clarification’ is necessary when what was said was all too accurately rendered.” That is the case here.

Pin It on Pinterest