McDonalds sued for non-Halal sandwitches

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: RiceCake
Its funny that someone eats at McDonalds, food that is the healthy equivalent of drywall, and the only problem they have is its not prepared to their liking in a factory a thousand miles away they'll never see.


Yeah really. It's just religion and social customs. I get the false advertising argument, but if you want to get down to the nitty gritty restaurants and other business falsely advertise all the time to some degree depending on the person's perception how significant it is.

But why come to country completely different from yours and expect all your customs to be accomodated? Prayer rooms in public places, women wearing cloths concealing their faces, signs posted in foreign languages, correct and non correct cartoons and limits on free speech..where does it all end?

From what the story said, MCDonald's tried to meet the Halal requirements whatever that is, but sometimes ran short and substituted. I don't really side with McDonald's much because they got they deserved trying to grab ever dollar and get the Muslim customers.
 
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: mechanicx

Exactly. It's bending over backwards to change and accomodate another group. It's not too far different from being overran and conquered in a conquest.


Thing is that what about the kosher tax ALL of us Americans pay so that the rabbis can put that U or D stamp on ALL food products.

Christians don't have a choice about this. I don't like having some creepy rabbis blessing my food. After all these tares killed Jesus [censored].

You won't believe this but the word censor blocked me from typing the name of
C h r i s t.

Insane!

I'm don't like the fact that Muslims are being admitted into the US in large numbers but I have no more liking for the fact that the jews control much of our society as well.



Aaaaaaand, lock'er up
33.gif


Looks like some one beat me to reporting your post.
 
Last edited:
gathermewool said:
So lets get this right, we can show our dislike for Muslim practices but not for jewish practices. VERY insightful.

I could be wrong but I think the only caveat is that you can't discuss politics here. This is not political at all.

Reporting my post. LOL
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Exactly. It's bending over backwards to change and accomodate another group. It's not too far different from being overran and conquered in a conquest.

I agree with you on paying a fee for Kosher crud.
 
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell


I could be wrong but I think the only caveat is that you can't discuss politics here. This is not political at all.

Reporting my post. LOL




No sex, religion, or politics.
 
Originally Posted By: Loobed




No sex, religion, or politics.



I looked for that and couldn't find that line.

However good enough, my mistake, I apologize for my posts.

. Mods should not only delete my posts but this ENTIRE thread since it is a thinly disguised attack on a religion.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tom slick
So if an oil is advertised as meeting API, VW, MB, Dexos, Ford, etc standards but it doesn't really meet them that's okay? Why should that oil blender bend over backward to meet their own advertising?

If your hamburger was really made of dog/cat/rats but said 100% beef that would be okay?

They expected that restaurant to prepare the food as advertised. For those people it's the same as eating food that doesn't meet our common health standards.

I don't agree with the lawsuit but I agree with their right to be angry.

+1, except the last sentence. Their non-Halal preparation of a sandwich advertised as meeting Halal standards makes it false advertising. The amount may be a bit excessive, depending on the length of time the false advertising went on and whether or not it was intentional or a simple oversight. That is how our (semi) free market system works and is the proper form of restitution, as far as I am concerned.

I'm just surprised it wasn't turned into a multimillion dollar class action lawsuit.
 
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: Loobed
No sex, religion, or politics.

I looked for that and couldn't find that line.

However good enough, my mistake, I apologize for my posts.

. Mods should not only delete my posts but this ENTIRE thread since it is a thinly disguised attack on a religion.

Sometimes the best place to hide something is right under your nose - or the title of the forum you are in.
grin2.gif


405375518.jpg
 
My page does NOT look like that Loobed.

I just noticed though that because I size my browser window smaller (since I have an old fashioned CRT it might have obscured that subtitle because things are bunched together.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: FoxS
Did you not read it was advertised as Halal?

What if a Jewish person found out his food was not Kosher?

Btw, do any of you eat Kosher meat? It's sacrificed the same way.


I guess I simply don't "get" the religious hang-up on meat. I'm not a religious person.

That said, I find it somewhat amusing that people are expecting food prepared to their religious standards from fast food chains, particular one like McDonalds, which is famous for greasy American cuisine.

That's like going into the Ahkbar hut of halal and then suing them for not properly making an "American Pizza" because it appears on their menu
smirk.gif



I'm not sure you get it. If people stopped buying sausage egg and cheese sandwiches, then McDonald's would either change the cheese, change the sausage, change the carb or take that item off the menu.

If a McDonald's is in a location where many of the people want it a certain way, be it for personal or religious reasons, then it makes financial sense to accommodate. If some one is religious and the McDonald's near them doesn't cater to their needs, they won't eat there. If some one is NOT and they don't like the veggie [censored], then they'll eat something or some where else, as well. It's common sense and not driven by religious sensitivities at all...

If you advertise food as peanut-free and it is not, then you will be sued if some one goes into anaphylactic shock. The same should be true if you advertise your food as [insert religious requirement here] compliant, but use something that is not to sell to more people.


I can drive up to Markham and not see a single non-Asian for MILES. I can't read the signs on half the buildings, yet I can go into the McDonalds there and order anything from the typical McDonalds menu. And I certainly can't get any sort of Asian food there. So it would appear as though the presence of different ethnicities in concentration are not the sole source of this.

To me it looks like McDonalds deviated from their rediculously popular standard fair to attract this particular audience and it back-fired in the form of a lawsuit.

On the other hand, I also find it ludicrous that one could expect religiously appropriate meat from a company that has been accused of having everything from cardboard to worms in their burgers over the years.

I think the expectations on both sides were a little high here.... This is McDonalds, home of the Big Mac, Quarter Pounder and fries with enough salt to burn your face. To expect what appears to be expected here just comes off as ridiculous in my mind. And I certainly don't think a successful $700,000 lawsuit is the appropriate outcome.
 
Originally Posted By: tom slick
So if an oil is advertised as meeting API, VW, MB, Dexos, Ford, etc standards but it doesn't really meet them that's okay? Why should that oil blender bend over backward to meet their own advertising?

If your hamburger was really made of dog/cat/rats but said 100% beef that would be okay?

They expected that restaurant to prepare the food as advertised. For those people it's the same as eating food that doesn't meet our common health standards.

I don't agree with the lawsuit but I agree with their right to be angry.


That's a ridiculous comparison. Those are actual standards and approvals to guarantee a level of performance in compliance with the standards set by those bodies and these are paid into. McDonalds makes no claims as to the performance of their food in your body other than it meets the government levels of not going to kill you stuff. For the price, what else should somebody expect? And its not like we are even talking about the QUALITY of the food, it's the fact it wasn't prepared in a religiously appropriate manner. Now unless the API starts advertising "Pope appropriate" blends with the blessing of the Vatican, I can't see how this comparison can be made, as the food wasn't any less or more pooptacular one way or the other; it didn't effect the "performance" of this premium product
smirk.gif


This is more like AutoZone selling "Super Premium" motor oil with the fine print reading "don't use in anything manufactured after 1954" and then Billy Bob suing Autozone because he expected the oil he paid $0.50/quart for to actually be some form of Super, and Premium.

This is McDonalds, the place you can buy a bag full of hambugers for $5.00. This is not the Mobil 1 of the food world and anybody who wasn't born yesterday or in some outhouse in Nunavut knows that.
 
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: Loobed
No sex, religion, or politics.

I looked for that and couldn't find that line.

However good enough, my mistake, I apologize for my posts.

. Mods should not only delete my posts but this ENTIRE thread since it is a thinly disguised attack on a religion.


No it isn't you fool, the point of the thread was to discuss the ridiculous lawsuit, not Muslims. I know, because I created the bloody thread!!!
 
Originally Posted By: rjundi
It was false advertising. They did not win per se, just received a settlement.


I don't disagree that it was false advertising. But as I mentioned in my earlier reply, I think expectations were too high from both sides on this. It is, after all, McDonalds, LOL!
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: Loobed
No sex, religion, or politics.

I looked for that and couldn't find that line.

However good enough, my mistake, I apologize for my posts.

. Mods should not only delete my posts but this ENTIRE thread since it is a thinly disguised attack on a religion.

No it isn't you fool, the point of the thread was to discuss the ridiculous lawsuit, not Muslims. I know, because I created the bloody thread!!!

So that was a simple spelling mistake in the title...
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL


No it isn't you fool, the point of the thread was to discuss the ridiculous lawsuit, not Muslims. I know, because I created the bloody thread!!!


I'm kinda surprised that you created this thread. But since it is you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Still friends? I hope so.

grin.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I can drive up to Markham and not see a single non-Asian for MILES. I can't read the signs on half the buildings, yet I can go into the McDonalds there and order anything from the typical McDonalds menu. And I certainly can't get any sort of Asian food there. So it would appear as though the presence of different ethnicities in concentration are not the sole source of this.

To me it looks like McDonalds deviated from their rediculously popular standard fair to attract this particular audience and it back-fired in the form of a lawsuit.

On the other hand, I also find it ludicrous that one could expect religiously appropriate meat from a company that has been accused of having everything from cardboard to worms in their burgers over the years.

I think the expectations on both sides were a little high here.... This is McDonalds, home of the Big Mac, Quarter Pounder and fries with enough salt to burn your face. To expect what appears to be expected here just comes off as ridiculous in my mind. And I certainly don't think a successful $700,000 lawsuit is the appropriate outcome.

McDonalds is a corporation and does not care at all about what we need as a society, but what we want enough to pay for frequently. If those "non-whites" you mentioned represented a large enough demand (of people who wanted a particular item on the menu,) then that item would probably be on the menu, just as it is in asian countries.

To comment on a point that was made earlier: what if this had happened as a result of people eating non-fish meat products on Lent? If a product is advertised as something that affects some one deeply, be it physically (i.e., allergic reaction) or religiously, and enough people who would not otherwise eat at McDonalds demand it, then Mcdonalds should be held accountable if that product is not as advertised.
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
No it isn't you fool, the point of the thread was to discuss the ridiculous lawsuit, not Muslims. I know, because I created the bloody thread!!!

So that was a simple spelling mistake in the title...
lol.gif


I took the title from the article
smile.gif
And that was certainly WHY they were being sued. The point of the thread was to discuss it, not focus on the particular religion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom