• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's [W:40]

Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

But that's not what happened here. McDonald's falsely advertised their products as halal. They weren't forced to do anything, and they certainly weren't forced to lie about their products.

Yeah but $700,000.00 because a guy thought his McChicken Sandwich was prepared in a way it wasn't is pretty steep.

I guess half the country, especially those in a place like Detroit, hate corporations so much that the corporation had to make a ridiculous settlement to avoid what would have been an even more punitive judgement.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

I think generalized irrational pronouncement towards ethic groups is lowest form of ignorance.

If he said all muslims were "twisted terrorist oriented Muslims" I would agree with you.


If you decide to ignore the definitions posted by removing them from my quote, that is entirely up to you. You are not free to then say "you have never heard it" that way.

again, I have never heard anyone legitimately refer to "muslim" as an ethnicity. It might be used as short hand to refer to ethnic groups that are heavily identified through their religion, but that isn't the same as "muslim" being an ethnicity. No more than people identifying the coptic christians, as "the christian ethnicities in egypt" make christian an ethnicity

as for your definition: "Ethnicity, or ethnic identity, refers to membership in a particular cultural group. It is defined by shared cultural practises, including but not limited to holidays, food, language, and customs."

it ignores that there isn't a shared form of "holidays, food language, and custom" among muslims". This is because Islam is made up of a multitude of ethnic groups who bring their own take on " holidays, food, language, and customs." to the islamic religion
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

They should not have to proclaim their condemnation on a daily basis. Sorry if I was less than clear.

ah, sorry for the misunderstanding
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Yeah but $700,000.00 because a guy thought his McChicken Sandwich was prepared in a way it wasn't is pretty steep.

I guess half the country, especially those in a place like Detroit, hate corporations so much that the corporation had to make a ridiculous settlement to avoid what would have been an even more punitive judgement.


I think McD's settles for over ten million when they got caught using beef tallow in their fries, while implying the were vegetarian
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Yeah but $700,000.00 because a guy thought his McChicken Sandwich was prepared in a way it wasn't is pretty steep.

I don't know, it seems fair to me.

You've gotta remember that this was a class action. It wasn't, legally speaking, a guy claiming that his sandwich was prepared in a manner inconsistent with the way McDonald's had advertised, it was everyone (ostensibly) who ever bougt a sandwich from that McDonald's making the claim.

When you consider that something like half of Dearborne's population is Arab, and most of those are prolly Muslim, and that this false advertising thing had been going on for years, it stands to reason that Muslims have been duped into spending well more than $700K on McD's food.

I guess half the country, especially those in a place like Detroit, hate corporations so much that the corporation had to make a ridiculous settlement to avoid what would have been an even more punitive judgement.

Either that or McDonalds was afraid that if this thing went to trial they would have stood to lose far more than what they settled for.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Facepalm.

An indian muslims and one from Saudi Arabia don't even practice the same holidays (the saudi man wouldn't observe Diwali). They might have religious holidays that overlap, like Eid, but that doesn't make them the same ethnicity. No more than me sharing the observance of Christmas with Coptic Christians make me a part of their ethnicity.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

I don't know, it seems fair to me.

You've gotta remember that this was a class action. It wasn't, legally speaking, a guy claiming that his sandwich was prepared in a manner inconsistent with the way McDonald's had advertised, it was everyone (ostensibly) who ever bougt a sandwich from that McDonald's making the claim.

When you consider that something like half of Dearborne's population is Arab, and most of those are prolly Muslim, and that this false advertising thing had been going on for years, it stands to reason that Muslims have been duped into spending well more than $700K on McD's food.



Either that or McDonalds was afraid that if this thing went to trial they would have stood to lose far more than what they settled for.

$700K because sandwiches were not prepared as advertised just seems excessive to me regardless of how many people ate them.

Plus, I just don't believe many kept halal so thoroughly as to make this a real offense.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

An indian muslims and one from Saudi Arabia don't even practice the same holidays (the saudi man wouldn't observe Diwali). They might have religious holidays that overlap, like Eid, but that doesn't make them the same ethnicity. No more than me sharing the observance of Christmas with Coptic Christians make me a part of their ethnicity.
Straw and reducto, it was not an argument that all are the same ethnicity, but that:

Ethnicity, or ethnic identity, refers to membership in a particular cultural group. It is defined by shared cultural practises, including but not limited to holidays, food, language, and customs.

Some definitions of racism also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Straw and reducto, it was not an argument that all are the same ethnicity, but that

did you just not claim and defend the position that "muslim" was an ethnicity? Yes, you did

He posted against an ethnic group, ie "Muslims".



Ethnicity, or ethnic identity, refers to membership in a particular cultural group. It is defined by shared cultural practises, including but not limited to holidays, food, language, and customs.

yes I am familier with the definition of ethnicity you posted. And as I just pointed out, "muslim" isn't a shared cultural group. It's a religous group that can create shared "cultural" practices among differing ethnicity


Some definitions of racism also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes

what does this have to do with you claiming "muslim" as an ethnicity?
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

l wonder how he found out that it wasnt a halal production




This method of slaughtering animals consists of a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the throat, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides but leaving the spinal cord intact.
According to Islamic tradition, the animal is brought to the place of slaughter and laid down gently so as to not injure it. The blade must be kept hidden until the very last moment while the jugular of the animal is felt. The conventional method used to slaughter the animal involves cutting the large arteries in the neck along with the esophagus and vertebrate trachea with one swipe of an non-serrated blade. Care must be taken that the nervous system is not damaged, as this may cause the animal to die before exsanguination has taken place. While blood is draining, the animal is not handled until it has died. If any other method is used its meat will not be halal.

This method adheres to Islamic law (it ensures the animal does not die by any of the Haraam methods) and helps to effectively drain blood from the animal. This may be important because the consumption of blood itself is forbidden in Islam,[Quran 2:173] however it is not clear that bleeding the animal removes all traces of blood from the carcass, so the meat may remain unclean. In fact it is stated by Islamic authorities that it is only necessary to drain 'most' of the blood from the animal.[12]





Forbidden for you are carrion, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that which has been slaughtered while proclaiming the name of any other than God, and one killed by strangling, and one killed with blunt weapons, and one which died by falling, and that which was gored by the horns of some animal, and one eaten by a wild beast, except those whom you slaughter; and that which is slaughtered at the altar and that which is distributed by the throwing of arrows [for an omen]; this is an act of sin.
—Al-Maa'idah 5:3

Dhabihah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


l already quitted eating at Mcdonads
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

UK had the same problem. Due to islamist movement, the meat companies were forced to do halal meat and commercialize it... and they didn't put a label on the product saying that: This meat was prepared according to halal.

Why?

because its a brutal, stupid, barbaric ritual and the merchants knew that if they put the label HALAL MEAT on their meat, decent people wouldn't buy it because they wouldn't support the barbarism.

How is it "having that problem" when the two situations, as you describe it, are nothing at all alike. In the situation here, McDonalds decided to advertise something they apparently where not providing, got busted for it, or at least did not expect a jury to buy their story, so settled the lawsuit. That is not even remotely like the situation you describe.

You can't say that, Redress. He was looking out for the interests of "decent people":shock:

Paul
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

what does this have to do with you claiming "muslim" as an ethnicity?
Um, it is the key point, that racism includes discrimination against a person based on their religion.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

UK had the same problem. Due to islamist movement, the meat companies were forced to do halal meat and commercialize it... and they didn't put a label on the product saying that: This meat was prepared according to halal.

Why?

because its a brutal, stupid, barbaric ritual and the merchants knew that if they put the label HALAL MEAT on their meat, decent people wouldn't buy it because they wouldn't support the barbarism.

So Kosher is okay but hala is not
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

$700K because sandwiches were not prepared as advertised just seems excessive to me regardless of how many people ate them.

When I said (above) that this settlement "sounded fair" to me I meant in relation to other false advertising settlements/judegements.

Just as a single example, Sketchers (the shoe company) settled for $45 million dollars because their "Shape Up" sandals didn't live up to the advertising claim that wearers would lose weight "without stepping foot in the gym".

You might find that excessive too, and I guess as far as it goes there's really nothing wrong with that, it's just your opinion after all so no big deal.

But I think we have a pretty clear standard in this country that if you market a product, and in doing so make claims that the product does not live up to, you're going to be held accountable for that (or at least, the potential exists that you will).

I simply think that $700K when we're talking about a relatively small population suing over a relatively inexpensive product is "fair" in comparison to a larger class suing over a more expensive product and getting $45 million.

Plus, I just don't believe many kept halal so thoroughly as to make this a real offense.

McDonald's market research had to have told them that advertising the food as halal was advisable otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

Whether or not people actually kept halal, or whether they simply told the folks running the focus group, polls, and surveys that they kept halal because it made them feel good about themselves is kinda immaterial.

Once McDonalds made that promise to consumers (that their food was halal), regardless of how they came to make the decision, they were obligated to live up to it.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Kind of strange. McDonald's has very strict food preparation methods and does not allow any of the franchisees to deviate at all from the central food preparation standards. That's why McDonald's food tastes the same no matter where you are.

Yet this particular McDonald's is sued for not property preparing tasty Muslim snacks?
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

How did the guy know it was pork it was a "chicken" sandwhich
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Um, it is the key point, that racism includes discrimination against a person based on their religion.

without getting into the issues with reducing every form of bigotry to "racism", I was clearly addressing your claim that "muslim" was an ethnicity. Which you even tried to defend, when I first addressed the issues with it.

So it's rather silly to now act as if we were discussing something else
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Kind of strange. McDonald's has very strict food preparation methods and does not allow any of the franchisees to deviate at all from the central food preparation standards. That's why McDonald's food tastes the same no matter where you are.

Yet this particular McDonald's is sued for not property preparing tasty Muslim snacks?

because they apparently advertised it as Halal
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

because they apparently advertised it as Halal

They're not supposed to do that either. Must be a rogue McDonald's.
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

Kind of strange. McDonald's has very strict food preparation methods and does not allow any of the franchisees to deviate at all from the central food preparation standards. That's why McDonald's food tastes the same no matter where you are.

Yet this particular McDonald's is sued for not property preparing tasty Muslim snacks?
maybe you need to read the link again
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

When I said (above) that this settlement "sounded fair" to me I meant in relation to other false advertising settlements/judegements.

Just as a single example, Sketchers (the shoe company) settled for $45 million dollars because their "Shape Up" sandals didn't live up to the advertising claim that wearers would lose weight "without stepping foot in the gym".

You might find that excessive too, and I guess as far as it goes there's really nothing wrong with that, it's just your opinion after all so no big deal.

But I think we have a pretty clear standard in this country that if you market a product, and in doing so make claims that the product does not live up to, you're going to be held accountable for that (or at least, the potential exists that you will).

I simply think that $700K when we're talking about a relatively small population suing over a relatively inexpensive product is "fair" in comparison to a larger class suing over a more expensive product and getting $45 million.



McDonald's market research had to have told them that advertising the food as halal was advisable otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

Whether or not people actually kept halal, or whether they simply told the folks running the focus group, polls, and surveys that they kept halal because it made them feel good about themselves is kinda immaterial.

Once McDonalds made that promise to consumers (that their food was halal), regardless of how they came to make the decision, they were obligated to live up to it.

there was also the case I cited earlier with similar concerns among hindus, that netted a 10 million dollar settlement
 
Re: Deal approved in Muslims' suit against McDonald's

McDonald's has very strict food preparation methods and does not allow any of the franchisees to deviate at all from the central food preparation standards.

McDonalds has two franchises, both located in Dearborne, MI, that are permitted to deviate from their central food preperation practices such that they may serve halal foods.
 
Back
Top Bottom