u/nickone1

Image 1 — Food delivery - halal problem
Image 2 — Food delivery - halal problem
▲ 66 r/MalaysianExMuslim+1 crossposts

Food delivery - halal problem

So after so many donkey years of ordering food delivery, it finally happened. My order is rejected by a rider because he refuses to deliver non-halal food.

From what I understand, riders CAN apply to only receiving orders from halal restaurants but it's limited by the company otherwise we'll have a hard time getting sufficient riders to deliver non-halal food. Or for all I know, this rider has no intention of doing so but chooses to cause who knows how much in food wastage from cancelled orders. And this is only 1 rider I'm talking about here. Who knows how many more experiences this.

Now because of this, I had to rush out to get dinner before work at 7pm & the restaurant had to incurr food wastage = food costs. Or some unlucky fella is gonna get cold reheated food from my cancelled order.

Instead of flagging a restaurant as halal/non-halal, why not flag as pork/non-pork or alcohol/non-alcoholic restaurants? There are countless non-halal restaurants that don't serve pork/alcohol which I'm sure 99.9% of riders are okay picking up from.

u/nickone1 — 2 hours ago

Or maybe your MBPJ just sucks?

Some people got “God” on their mind 24/7. But what if your god just sucks?

If he’s all powerful and can actually intervene in this fucked up world, why does he care more about people partying at Rain Rave than the actual suffering happening everywhere else?

Look at Gaza. Look at Sudan. Look at poverty, homelessness, war, abuse, and millions of people struggling just to survive.

As someone from the B40 group myself, it feels unfair as hell. People say “God can change your life” or “everything happens for a reason,” but apparently he can flood roads while people are trying to get home from work, yet somehow giving struggling families financial relief is too much?

You’re telling me an all powerful god watches people suffer every single day and this is still considered part of some perfect plan?

u/nickone1 — 7 days ago

And i thought Reddit is better than Thread

Had a discussion about evolution, the Big Bang, and the concept of afterlife, and it mainly came down to how we define “evidence” and “belief”.

From their side, the argument was that differences between generations (like height or facial features) are just genetics, not evolution. And that humans looking similar to primates doesn’t mean we came from them.

I explained that genetics is actually part of evolution itself. Evolution isn’t about sudden dramatic change, but small changes accumulating over long periods of time. And humans don’t come from modern apes, but we share a common ancestor with them.

On the Big Bang, they argued it’s “just a theory” with no proof, and that something can’t come from nothing. I pointed out that in science, a theory doesn’t mean a guess, but a well-supported explanation based on observations. For example, we see galaxies moving apart (expansion of the universe) and cosmic background radiation, which are strong evidence that the universe had an early hot, dense state. It doesn’t answer everything, but it’s supported by measurable data and ongoing research.

The main disagreement was really about evidence versus belief. I said science is built on observable, testable evidence, even if it still has unanswered questions. But ideas like the afterlife rely more on faith and religious texts.

On the topic of God, the argument given was that “this is His nature, so it cannot be questioned,” and that the main proof of existence is based on scripture that was compiled after the time of the messenger had passed.

From my perspective, that’s where the conversation stops being about evidence and becomes about faith. Not necessarily saying one side is right or wrong, but they operate on completely different standards of what counts as proof.

TLDR:
We disagreed on what counts as evidence. I argued that evolution and the Big Bang are based on observable scientific data and can be tested, while ideas like the afterlife are based more on belief and scripture. The other side rejected evolution and the Big Bang as “just theories” and leaned on faith-based explanations for God’s existence. The core difference was science relies on evidence, while their view relies on belief/faith.

u/nickone1 — 8 days ago