'Excessive alcohol consumption not only brings costs in terms of personal health, but tangible social costs in terms of lost productivity, health care costs, road accident costs and crime-related costs that have been estimated at $10.8 billion in 2004-05.'*(Australia's Health 2008)
Surah 5 of the Quran
Verse 91: Satan's plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will ye not then abstain?
Verse 92: Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back, know ye that it is Our Messengers duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest manner.
Sayings of the prophet
-Tariq ibn Suwayd or Suwayd ibn Tariq asked the Prophet(pbuh) about wine, but he forbade it. He again asked him, but he forbade him. He said to him: Prophet of Allah, it is a medicine. The prophet(pbuh) said No its a disease.
-Allah's Messenger (pbuh) cursed ten people in connection with wine: the wine-presser, the one who has it pressed, the one who drinks it, the one who conveys it, the one to whom it is conveyed, the one who serves it, the one who sells it, the one who benefits from the price paid for it, the one who buys it, and the one for whom it is bought.
Just for comparison sake, 10.8 billion dollar represents 1/3 of the Kenyan or Sri Lankan Total Economy or the Total Combined Economy of Cape Verde, Eritrea, Bhutan, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, Maldives, Burundi, Djibouti, Liberia, Seychelles, Gambia, Zimbabwe.
If only
*
http://www.aihw.gov.au/mediacentre/2008/mr20080624.cfm
2 comments:
dude..to state an arguement on something u need to study it first..so thats why i told u to study evolution first.. how can u say ( in ur case copy and paste ) without even having the minimal knowledge about a subject..
I visited ur harun yahya site which i find equally uninteresting rather than a few pics it doesnt provide any scientific background to its arguements.. or even a scientific source or material from proper evoultionary scientists
Anyway regarding the picture of the mandible u have asked me to answer..Its in my best of knowledge is austrolopithecine or if its younger than u mentioned can be homo erectus..but if u question why it might have features that deviates it from the some other mandibles found within the same time..u need to have more knolwedge about the out of africa and the multiregional hypothesis ..either one although different describes the most possible answer to ur question..furthermore..it is never mentioned as a human ( homo sapien ) mandible by any scientist, rather its a hominid mandible ..anyway learn more about evolution then i am ready to have a proper arguement with u...for a start u can read david leaky..
You look so desperate to defend your theory after I posted the use of false evidences and forgeries by evolutionists to advance their pagan ideology. You complicate matters and cannot answer with simplicity and scientific facts. Thats a normal darwinist propaganda, hiding under the guise of 'science' to mislead people. And by the way your whole response was ludicrous. If you re-read my post the mandible is a purely human mandible. A homo-sapien sapien. How can such a mandible date back to 2.5 million years ago when foolish evolutionists who spent their years explaining their theory say the modern humans(H.S.Sapien)came only some thousand years ago???
I will be posting further fossil evidences to show that animals and plants have both remained exactly similar over million of years without ever undergoing evolution. So please stay tuned without prejudice.
Post a Comment