Almost a year ago, the New York Times ran an op-ed claiming that Pres. Obama was an apostate from Islam. Implicit in that declaration is that he was at one time a Muslim. Earlier this month, the Washington Times ran an op-ed, from one of the new “know nothings,” who wants to be taken seriously on matters of US security, claiming once again that “there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself,” an idea worthy of ridicule.
Some unsuspecting people may be tempted to ask “Is Barack Obama Muslim?” Of course, as Colin Powell so eloquently put it, “so what?” What people do not seem to understand is that it is not a crime in the United States to have a religion, to be a believer in that religion, or to practice your religion. I am disturbed that so many so-called “security experts” wish to criminalize religion in this country.
What Frank Gaffney, the author of the op-ed in question, does is try to make respectful behavior a treasonous act. Rather than build bridges, he would apparently like to see the US trapped in endless wars, perhaps to justify his own career. He begins by stating that Pres. Obama is our first Muslim president [in fact, he’s our second] in the same way Pres. Clinton was our first black president. According to him, it’s not about what they are, but about the “special interests” they pander to. Although somewhat odious in its construction that American citizens are “special interests,” it does not seek to create a new identity for Pres. Obama.
Gaffney begins by saying that “‘much has been made’—in this case by him and his campaign handlers — of the fact that he became a Christian,” without acknowledging that the reason Pres. Obama and his team had to keep saying he was Christian is because people kept treating “Muslim” as smear to use against Pres. Obama. Gaffney then lists things that would normally be seen as respectful as signs that Pres. Obama is Muslim. It seems unclear if Gaffney is arguing that Muslims are more civil than he is, or if there is a transitive property involved—that by being nice to someone, you become that person. By that logic, one would assume that if Gaffney were seen petting a dog, he would be comfortable of being accused of bestiality.
In a point by point breakdown, it seems that Gaffney does not interact much with Americans. My non-Muslim students at inter-faith sessions use the phrase “Holy Qur’an” far more than I do, it’s how they show they are taking another faith seriously. To say a religion is “revealed” is actually normal language if you do not wish to cast aspersions on another’s faith. Finally, he takes exception that Pres. Obama wished for peace on a Jewish Prophet, the Son of God, and the Muslim Prophet. Is Gaffney opposed to wishing peace on these people? In his view, apparently a prayer for peace is something only a Muslim would do.
I must say that I am surprised that the Muslim Brotherhood is a global movement. Historians, political scientists, and other specialists will generally tell you the Brotherhood is limited to Egypt, and perhaps to neighboring countries. Apparently, as a security expert, Gaffney knows something that no one else in the world does, and for the sake of American security, I hope he shares it soon. One can argue that there are Brotherhood inspired groups throughout the world, but there is no international syndicate of the Muslim Brotherhood. Although Gaffney accuses Pres. Obama of supporting shari’ah, without defining which shari’ah, thereby making a new “scare” word, he does not say how Pres. Obama does so.
Of course, his true point is to talk about Israel and try to create a cosmic war between Jews and Muslims over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He ignores that Fatah recognizes Israel’s right to exist, or that Hamas has agreed to negotiate with that premise. He also ignores the large number of Palestinian Christians, treating all Palestinians as Muslim, and all Muslims as Palestinians.
I do not agree with Gaffney’s point that Americans should be denied the ability to choose and practice their own religions. Nor do I agree with him that religious people should have no civil liberties. However, I do agree that Pres. Obama’s numbers of US Muslims is high. Most academic studies have it at about 6 million, not 7 million. The 2 million number seems far too low as we have almost 1 million Muslims in New York City alone.
I wonder at what point the major papers—yes, even the Washington Times—will stop publishing op-eds by people with no expertise in the field in which they are writing? Perhaps when “security experts” actually start thinking about national security and not job security.
Tags: apostasy, frank gaffney, muslim, obama, washington times
Comments closed
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.