Abstract

This article examines Anna Joseph’s suggestion of introducing into United States law a requirement to stun an animal still found to be conscious after 40 seconds following initial cutting during religious slaughter. It is suggested that the proposed law fails to address significant ethical concerns based on scientific evidence. The conflict with human rights legislation, especially religious freedom, is discussed. A new consumers’ rights approach is proposed that highlights the life of the animal and may provide a universally applicable legal framework for meat production. This may avoid the pitfalls of conflicting with human rights, thereby enabling the revision of practices through education, information, and changing consumer behavior.