Pinikpikan: Beating the chicken alive

[sakiman]

[iskrotum]

Dapat ipagbawal yang lecheng tradisyon na yan.

[sophion]

i dont cook. i wonder pwede bang magluto ng pinikpikan without beating a chicken to death?

[iskrotum]

i dont cook. i wonder pwede bang magluto ng pinikpikan without beating a chicken to death?

Hinde. Magiiba ang lasa or texture.

[sophion]

Hinde. Magiiba ang lasa or texture.

if its food i'm not sure kung dapat ipagbawal. kawawa iyung manok. but its for us to eat it.

[tonton]

That tradition should be outlawed. If we must kill animals for food, we must do it in the least painful/ most humane manner possible.

[sophion]

That tradition should be outlawed. If we must kill animals for food, we must do it in the least painful/ most humane manner possible.

and what would that be for chickens?

[Bigot3AtBalbas]

Chop lang leeg. Mabilis at painless

[matangkahoy]

That tradition should be outlawed. If we must kill animals for food, we must do it in the least painful/ most humane manner possible.

Utterly disgusting and probably invented by a group of drunks.

[tonton]

Chop lang leeg. Mabilis at painless

Ganyan ang ginawa ng nanay ko nung maliit ako. Tsak!! Isang ganon lang, tapos. Mabilis. Di nga alam ng manok na wala na siya ulo at tumakbo pa eh.

[Ischaramoochie]

anaesthesia muna bago bugbugin?

[goat1230]

the goal of the dish is for blood be present in the meat, making it a lot tastier than not doing so. kung dedbol na si manok bago bugbugin, hindi pupunta ang dugo sa karne (daw)

if this will be outlawed, what about the more famous and as far as i know sought after foie gras?

[knives_18]

I'm a igorot on both sides of my parent, pinikpikan is a very common dishes sa probinsya namin sa M.T. province and i could really say na napakasarap nito lalo pag native chicken. Yung pagkatay nito is a tradition that passed down to us since the time God only know. Even i myself learned how to do it at nagkakatay ako from time to time ng pinikpikan. Ipokrito yung mga nagsasabing dapat ipagbawal to as if naman na more humane yung pagkatay ng ibang mga hayop and as if na yung manok will really care.

[marcus_hunt]

Ganyan ang ginawa ng nanay ko nung maliit ako. Tsak!! Isang ganon lang, tapos. Mabilis. Di nga alam ng manok na wala na siya ulo at tumakbo pa eh.

naalala ko nagpupustahan pa kami kung aling manok ang mas matagal ang pagtakbo ng walang ulo

as if na yung manok will really care.

manok ka rin ba dati?

[Ateo]

This thread is a great illustration of how morality or a moral view on an issue develops or evolves.

In the secular/atheist/subjective perspective, morality is debated and argued for. It is bound to change. People who adopt this perspective are comfortable with ambiguity and learn various principles in order to manage the ambiguity. In this perspective, the resulting moral principle is actionable by government and useful to the people.

Pinikpikan, in this example, is replete with ambiguity. On one end, it is part of the culture of the Mt Provinces and it is generally moral to respect cultures. On the other end, it is not moral to unnecessarily hurt sentient beings (those with feelings). Whatever results in our debate will even inform our laws (Act Preventing Cruelty to Animals) which then guides people.

In contrast, the so-called theistic/absolute morality perspective claims that their morality comes from God -- unchanging, all good -- and is articulated in the Bible. It is supposed to be clear and not ambiguous. And, if applied by society, will be good for it.

In the case of pinikpikan, the theistic/absolute morality is useless. We don't know how to use the Bible in this case. Some pastors might cite Jesus treatment to pigs and say, voila, it is okay to treat animals badly. Some might cite Genesis saying that Man was given dominion over animals, thus he could do anything he wants. Then, a priest might claim that St. Francis of Assisi loved animals of all kinds. In effect, any theist could cite any part of the Bible or tradition and claim absolute morality over an issue. But the result is still confusion. And no government would use Francis of Assisi or Genesis on the basis of any law in treating animals. People ignore the Bible as any guidance of their behavior on the issue.

My point is that subjective/secular morality is superior and robust in addressing any emerging moral/ethical dilemma.

[marcus_hunt]

Amen ra to that, ateo.

One thing though, respect is such a big word para ikabit natin sa culture at religion. Tolerate na lang siguro.

[pieno]

Wala namang brutality sa Animals kung walang example ang Islam. Dahil sa Islam napigilan ang pag-spread ng PEACE at yung Humane treatment ng tao sa kapwa nya animal. Kung sa Islam nga eh superior daw sila sa kapwa nila tao, ano pa sa animals? Parang Hitler-Japanese Imperial Army lang yan... sa mga Hapon noong WW2 sa Pinas, binabato ang mga baby sabay tusok ng bayonet sa ere eh.. may pagkaganyan din ang idolo nilang mga anti-Semitic Muslim.

[Ischaramoochie]

hanukamu?

[pieno]

Kapag napaghulihan ka ng panahon ganyan talaga, naniniwala ka pa sa mga brutal. Ang mga Igorot kawawa mga animals dyan. Noong WW2, laking gulat ng mga Hapon hahaha kala nila sina na pinaka-orctard twins ni Muhammad sa giyera nagkakamali sila hahahaha kala nila brutal na sila sa dating na yun... pagpunta nila sa mga igorot pinagmamasaker sila... binabali yung "panga" nila, inihihiwalay sa katawan nila at kinokolekta.. sinong may pinakamaraming koleksyon siya ang bida, maraming tattoo....

Ganyan din sa Islam. Dahil sa utos ni Muhammad "Forever 600AD" kaya forever 600 AD... live broadcast pupugutan ng ulo ang tao sa Saudi... very backward haha

[jeric92002]

Ganyan ang ginawa ng nanay ko nung maliit ako. Tsak!! Isang ganon lang, tapos. Mabilis. Di nga alam ng manok na wala na siya ulo at tumakbo pa eh.

Sakin din nung bata pa ako yung tito ko naman, nagtataka nga ako bat wala nang ulo gumagalaw pa katawan eh hahaha. Tapos yung dugong sumisirit nilalagay sa sinain HAHAHA