The US Security Service (FSIS) of the USA (FSIS) does not participate in the definition of religious standards, such as what is or is not a free. Saad Ali in the main halal meat in Harrisberg, Pennsylvania, appreciates this fact.
“This respect for religious freedom is one of the many reasons why we value our country, since the government does not interfere with theological issues,” Ali wrote, submitting a petition to label the product in FSIS on August 25.
He noted that FSIS “is responsible for ensuring that the labels of the product are true and do not mislead.”
In the latter case, FSIS turned to the Islamic method of killing animals in 2016, as well as in response to the petition. The bunning method is subject to specific conditions set forth in Islamic jurisprudence. These conditions are designed to ensure that the fighter is performed by the humane and Islamic manner of consistent with the principles of the free (permissible) food consumption.
FSIS denied the application of 2016, in which the agency sought to determine whether the source of meat and poultry, identified as a freebie, was suppressed manually or mechanically killed.
The petition of 2025 with a request for FSI to take one of two actions regarding the term “Zabiha Halal”, including: 1. Determine the “Hael halal” as manually, without stunning, in accordance with generally accepted Islamic standards; Or 2. Suppose FSIS decides not to determine the term. In this case, this should require the use of the term as a third-party certified requirement, while the certifying body clearly publishes its definition of Zabiha Halal on a public web site analogically how many organic certificates work.
Ali admitted that not all members of the Muslim community object to the current FSIS policy – only 2 out of 18 comments at the request of 2016 were against. He says that this still indicates that the vast majority supports greater specificity. The petition of 2025 is a balanced solution that adapts both points of view: those who are satisfied with the status -kVO, and those who wish more clear standards comply with traditional Islamic principles.
Comments on the new petition are still accepted. The first comment was from someone, who did not want to be identified:
“This is great, I hope that they observe one of these rules. It is terrible that we were broken, thinking that our meat is a freebie, but usually it is just murdered mechanically, and they give it to the freebie. They also export these products around the world, so you could be a Muslim in a Muslim country, thinking that you are eating a hail, but in fact not in America. Correct meat for my family. ”
Katie Laurient from Denverian sausage Paysano adheres to another point of view: “This type of massacre should not be allowed. In the meat industry, we always tried to find humane ways to kill animals. As a society, we decided that the amazing animal is at first more humane. Let's not return to the barbaric systems to strengthen a very small minority. Most Muslims in this country do not require this.
And from someone, who is identified only as Jean Public1, this comment was: “I do not support any kind of free murder of animals. I find it offensive, terrible. Kill, so the animal experiences pain, bleeding. I do not support any support for applications in the United States in the United States.
Ali petition was assigned to considerate the management of politics and FSIS programs, and he was assigned a petition of 25-03.
(To subscribe to a free subscription to news about food safety, Click here.)
