for those who justify the Halel distortion by comparing it to Kosher

http://www.qwire.net/2014/12/what-about-kosher.html#.VKY1YXslt_h

For those not understanding the ethics of
ritual slaughter:

http://theconversation.com/explainer-the-ethics-of-ritual-slaughter-2101

Dear Josephus,

<<Food produced and sold in Australia has to meet quality health standards to be fit for human consumption.>>

True, but this is not something to be proud about - it's about the nanny state imposing and enforcing its views on what is fit and what isn't. What about those who consciously agree between them to sell and buy food that is presumably unfit for human consumption? Oh, they are believed to be healthier in jail (or if they commit suicide to avoid it), would they?

<<Should further impost be placed on companies and passed to consumers to support a religious organisation?>>

Definitely not, but why "further"? These two issues, health and religion, have no significant relation between them.

<<Should there be laws to stop religious organisations intimidating companies who meet health standards from boycotting foods not carrying halel certification when they meet Australian standards on food.>>

There are already laws against intimidation, all is needed is to enforce them.

However, the whole health issue is a red herring: health standards and religion have little to do with each other and are not designed for the same purpose.

<<Those religious laws are ancient health laws because meat was being sold or exchanged from beasts that had died from disease or other causes.>>

That is only a hypotheses. It could perhaps be correct, or more likely partially correct - who can tell what the authors had in mind 2500-3500 and 1400 years ago respectively, but even then the reasons Jews and Muslims keep the Kosher/Halal rules today have nothing to do with health. Actually for most Jews/Muslims who consider buying Kosher/Halal, health had probably never crossed their mind.

Actually Yuyutsu it had everything to do with health.
In their ancient context pig meat was definitely unhealthy and was
banned by the Rabbis and the ban was picked by Mohommad.
However the Chinese worked out what was wrong with the animal husbandry
of the time and made changes to keep the pigs parasite free.
The word got passed back to Europe about Roman times but the Middle
East could not find God's phone number to get the ban lifted.

So the present Moslem paranoia about ham & bacon was valid in pre
Christian times but is now an anachronism.

Dear Bazz,

<<Actually Yuyutsu it had everything to do with health.>>

That's a speculation - your guess is as good as anyone's and the evidence is long gone or obfuscated.

<<So the present Moslem paranoia about ham & bacon was valid in pre Christian times but is now an anachronism.>>

That's a misunderstanding of motive: the Muslims of today are not paranoid about the health issues related to pigs, but most likely about the possibility of disobeying their prophet, their leaders and their parents and the result of being cut-off from their group of reference.

To illustrate, suppose your father told that if you were ever to eat pig then you will be disinherited: the health of the pig is not an issue - your relationship with your father is! Wouldn't you also be paranoid about it in that case?

Wrong Yuyutsu they say quite specifically it is unclean.
They could not even be buried with a ham sandwich.