Sometimes the best way to resolve an irrational problem is with an irrational solution. Case in point: a young child's fear of monsters. Instead of fighting the uphill battle that is "there is no such thing as monsters," I rid my children's rooms of imaginary intruders with a can of air freshener I'd covered in paper and marked "Monster Killer." I went so far as to hunt down and mortally assault a few who attempted to escape. I bought the children time (and sleep) with this method, allowing them to feel safe until they realized on their own that they were never in danger.

Many Americans irrationally believe in insurance because of their irrational fear of uncertainty. Like children left to their own devices, they have allowed their fear to consume them, going so far as to pay the monster itself to protect them from other monsters that the first monster has repeatedly warned them against with exaggerated tales of woe and demise.

Islamic scholars have come out in religious opposition to the very concept of insurance. It almost sounds anti-capitalistic, but if you listen closely you can hear the spray of air freshener.

In The New Nation, Dr Mahbub Alam says, "Islamic scholars have objection to the concept of conventional insurance. In their view, the elements of Gharar (Uncertainty), Maisir (Gambling) and Riba (Usury) are involved in insurance contracts, which make it un-Islamic."

I'm not a fan of the Islamic faith. To be fair, I'm not a fan of any faith. It all requires way too much faith in that which is not provable - kind of like the thing insurance companies purport to sell: certainty.

As an alternative to health insurance, Dr. Alam suggests Takaful, "...the concept of social solidarity, cooperation and mutual indemnification of losses of members. It is a promise among a group of persons who agree to jointly indemnify the loss or damage that may inflict upon any of them, out of the fund they donate collectively. The Takaful contract so agreed usually involves the concepts of Mudarabah, Tabarru' (to donate for benefit of others) and mutual sharing of losses with the overall objective of eliminating the element of uncertainty."

Dr. Alam continues, "In case of any natural calamity, everybody used to contribute something until the loss was indemnified."

If this sounds familiar, it's because it smacks of socialized medicine. The most notable difference between the two is the middleman. Socialized medicine's middleman is the government. With Takaful, the contributors (the people themselves) are their own middlemen.