posted on May, 27 2017 @ 12:27 AM
I know pork is forbidden in Islam, as it is in Judaism. If a company wishes to benefit from selling halal or kosher food, then it is incumbent upon
them to ensure said food is compliant. The same goes for food allergies... if a deli is informed that someone has a serious peanut allergy and they
still serve food prepared with peanuts stating it is peanut-free, they are liable.
My first concern was that it contained pepperoni, which contains pork... but it has been pointed out that there is such a thing as halal pepperoni,
made with beef instead of pork.
Then I was concerned over his claim of becoming nauseous after eating pork. That wouldn't make sense unless he knew it was pork. If he knew he had
eaten pork, however, and was devout, that could easily cause a psychological-induced physical reaction. Him being so aware of the difference between
regular and halal pepperoni means it takes no stretch of the imagination to believe he tasted the difference while eating the pizza.
I don't believe any establishment should be forced to sell halal food, kosher food, etc. That is their choice; doing so will of course open them to
false advertising claims and probably cost more, but it will also broaden their customer base. If they decide to cater to such requirements, however,
the responsibility to ensure compliance is on them... not on the customer, save to do due diligence in verifying as much as possible that their food
is as ordered. In this case, there may have been no reasonable way to verify halal compatibility without actually eating it... does halal pepperoni
look different from regular pepperoni?
The facts will, of course, be sorted out in court, but as for now I tend to believe Mr. Bazzi. If the restaurant was at fault, they should be held
responsible. If the manager was incorrect about Bazzi asking for a halal label instead of a halal pizza, then that would be insult to injury and I
believe a substantial award is indicated.
Maybe not $100M, though... that does sound excessive.