Home / Weak arguments / Exaggeration or attack
"All animals are slaughtered fully conscious, without stunning."
They claim more than the evidence supports, or attack people instead of discussing what they do.
Why it is weak
It's a generalization. In the European Union and in Brazil, the law requires stunning cattle, pigs and poultry before bleeding, and in the United States federal law requires it for mammals, though not for poultry. Most slaughter follows these rules, even with failures and exceptions.
Anyone who knows the industry takes the phrase apart on the spot, and the real problem, which is serious, hides behind the exaggeration.
How to say it better
Say what the law allows and what fails: birds shackled conscious before stunning, a gas that pigs avoid, religious slaughter without stunning, fish almost always killed by suffocation. And even with the best stunning, the animal is still killed.