There’s a small possibility that I’m wrong, but this photograph (taken by my dad) seems to be of a Bouncy Mosque. That is, a mosqueified version of that stalwart of children’s playthings, the bouncy castle. There are certain not-so-subtle clues that lead us to this conclusion. It has minarets, for one thing, and, if my eyes do not deceive me, it has images of a man and a woman praying on it. Kind of amazing.

Now, I was all prepared to be mildly offended by this, or at least troubled, wondering if it’s a bit of a no-no to turn a mosque (or other religious edifice) into a bouncy castle. But I was also titillated – how could I avoid it? Anyway, I fired it off to my two coolest Muslim friends to see what they thought.

They thought – and I quote – “That is awesome!” and “Love it!”, respectively. So perhaps my initial vague caution was “political correctness gone wild”. I think that it’s possible that the BoingBoing piece I read earlier this morning on hidden prejudice (“What I got wrong about women in science“) had some influence there.

So now, free of unease, I say to you: isn’t it hilariously fitting how the kids have to take their shoes off to play in the bouncy mosque?!

A brief consideration this evening of people who believe in things. Well, who believe very strongly in things. Religions are the most obvious category of this kind of thing, but other beliefs, particularly concerning ethics, fit this too, like (ethical) vegetarianism or (ethical) environmentalism.

Something odd, perhaps, about those of our beliefs that we hold very strongly is that we often don’t act on them, or even act much like we really believe them. Take me being a vegetarian for example. If I believe that killing sentient animals for food is so very wrong, then why am I so willing to exist in a society where that’s the norm?

To me this is probably more of a problem for people of strong religious persuasions. The “problem” of hell is the best example, I guess. If I strongly believed (or “knew”) that my friend, who is not of the same religious persuasion, or even denomination, as me is going to hell (to burn eternally in a pit of fire etc.), how could I just let that happen? And what about everyone else in the world? Can I really think it’s okay to stand aside and let them suffer?

Some of this comes down to a kind of willful ignoring of the situation, of course (I’d put myself in that camp in terms of vegetarianism). Some of it might well come down to “well, they deserve to go to hell” kind of reasoning. But really, these don’t seem like particularly good reasons. Maybe “don’t rock the boat” is in there too, but does it outweigh eternal torment for others, or unethical killing of sentient beings? Surely not.

So really, although there’s coverage of the shocking beliefs and practices of fundamentalists of all kinds (from PETA to terrorists), it’s actually somewhat surprising to me that there are so few people acting on their deeply held beliefs.

Took this picture a while ago because I love those quilting sentiments you see. This one is particularly great because it has religious content: folksy sayings about angels.

“Snowflakes fall when angels have a pillowfight.” “Freckles are angel kisses.” “Earthly angels are mothers in disguise”

I’ve been reading plenty of books on religion lately, such as Karen Armstrong’s “A History of God” and Jack Miles’ “A Biography of God”, so I find it quite entertaining, and almost a relief, to see this kind of low-key take on religion. At the same time, the literalist in me can’t help but wonder how it all came to this. Angels, crucial figures in the Bible, Torah, and Qu’ran are reduced to being the creators of snowflakes and freckles.

I wonder if there’s a book on the pop-culture of angels?