Islam is a hot topic right now, and with the rise of extremists and islamophobes who claim that the religion is all about violence (and for practically the same reasons), I decided to do a little bit of research and find out the answer for myself.
So, is Islam violent or peaceful? I picked out in a selection of three verses from the Qur’an which appear to support violence:
- Surah 2, verse 191: “And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.”
- Surah 4, verse 74: “Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.”
- Surah 61, verse 4: “Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.”
Some pretty solid stuff there. But it isn’t fair and balanced reporting if I don’t also mention three verses that refer to Islam as a religion of peace:
- Surah 2, verse 256: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.”
- Surah 9, verse 6: “And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not.”
- Surah 41, verse 33: “The good deed and the evil deed are not alike. Repel the evil deed with one which is better, then lo! he, between whom and thee there was enmity (will become) as though he was a bosom friend”
There’s probably a whole lot more, but I decided to limit my search to three of each because I’m not a religious scholar and I write this blog in my spare time. This was enough to prove that this approach will not provide a definitive answer, especially since the verses were all cherry-picked and taken completely out of context.
This got me thinking that maybe Islam is not a religion that promotes violence or peace. Maybe, just like other 1,000+ year old religions based on a text filled with archaic and often contradictory verses, it is just a religion followed by a large number of people and open to their individual interpretations. Some of those people want to kill every non-Muslim and put the world to fire and sword, and some of those people want to live in peace and harmony with all mankind, and probably most fit somewhere in the middle.
And so it comes to pass that the people who want to kill every non-Muslim and put the world to fire and sword read the Qur’an and look for the verses that can be interpreted as saying “kill every non-Muslim and put the world to fire and sword”. And the people who want to live in peace and harmony with all mankind read the Qur’an and look for verses that can be interpreted as saying “live in peace and harmony with all mankind”. And each do their thing while claiming the Qur’an as their authority to do so.
I guess the real message here is that we shouldn’t lump all Muslims together as a homogenous group (i.e., the basic definition of bigotry), the same way we don’t lump all Christians together as a homogenous group.
Might I suggest that you forgo just *one* of the twelve different types of AA battery (or at least limit each kind to just one slot) and throw in a few of the other commonly used battery types?
Luckily, Chemist Warehouse was able to give me some CR2032 batteries, which I use to power 4 things in my home. Sure, they had to limit themselves to only eleven kinds of AA battery, but look how many kinds of button cell (I count at least 16) they were able to cram in to about the same amount of space as Coles:
Have you ever wondered why staff on a long-haul flight always say that the plane is “pressurised for your comfort”?
The cruising altitude of a plane is typically between 7,500 and 12,000 metres.
The air pressure at 10,000 metres is only 80% of the air pressure at the top of Mount Everest. According to a bunch of folks who did oxygen tests on some Everest climbers in 2009 (and wrote a paper about it for the New England Journal of Medicine) a person not acclimatised to the altitude of Mount Everest will die within 2-3 minutes [PDF].
Oh, and it’s also about -50°C (-58° F), so you would probably need an extra blanket.
So as long as your definition of comfort is “not suffocating or freezing to death” then yes, one could say that the plane is pressurised for your comfort.
I never understood how the success of a movie during the opening weekend came to be such a key selling point. Surely the second weekend is a much better measure? During the first weekend there is not much in the way of word of mouth: friends have not had time to convince friends that they should shell out a large-ish chunk of their life savings for a movie ticket.
The only thing that the opening weekend measures is the success of the marketing of the film.
I’m not denying that that’s important, given the commercial nature of the film industry, I’m just saying that the opening weekend figures should not be reported to the general public with the prominence that they get now. We don’t all rush out to a particular restaurant because a marketing report noted an increase in patronage following the erection of a billboard. So why should the movie marketers get a free ride?
I hate when a TV station re-runs a program and calls it an “encore presentation”. An encore is when one goes to a concert and the band is so fantastically excellent that when they finish the audience begs them to come back and play more songs. It is not an exact repeat of a TV show that was aired just hours or days before because the TV station has spent a lot of money on it and is desperate to scrounge up some viewers so they can trumpet the show as a success to the advertising companies even if it means just repeating the same thing ad nauseum until people eventually watch it by mistake because there’s nothing else on.
Calling it “encore” also bugs me because it implies that people actually want to watch the show again, which is patently false: the people who really wanted to see it already watched/torrented/taped it. We all know it’s hard, with multiple digital channels and 24 hours to fill on each one. I’m just asking for a little honesty. Just call it what it really is: a re-run.
I saw this in my local supermarket the other day
In my local supermarket the other day, I saw these Milo bars. A ten-piece value pack; and what great value it is at only $2.77/100g (or $0.749 each).
But then I looked a little to my left, and saw this:
It is exactly the same thing, except this packet has only six bars in it. But wait, at only $4.00 for the box, that works out to $2.50/100g (or $0.667 each). Surely this latter item is the true value pack!
Moral of the story: don’t trust the marketing!