ACTION: Answer NYT op-ed on Obama and Islam

This was originally written by a friend of mine, Steven Beller, and posted on his page on the Obama website. He doesn't have an account here and gave me permission to repost.

From Steven Beller's blog:

There is a malicious op-ed by Edward Luttwak about Obama and Muslim states:

Luttwak claims that Obama, because he is viewed as originally a Muslim by Islam, will be regarded as an apostate for his "conversion" to Christianity, and hence will be regarded as anathema by the Muslim world. My sense is that this is an outrageous--and malicious--misinterpretation both of Obama's religious background and of the Muslim world's perception of him and his status vis. a vis. Islam. However, I am not well enough versed in Obama's religious background or in Islam's rules concerning individuals with Muslim heritage such as Obama to comment definitively on Luttwak's piece (which is clearly intended to cause mischief).

More after the jump.

I therefore urge all supporters of Obama who read this piece, and know what I do not know about Obama's religious background and Islam's approach to someone with his heritage, to tell me what the true answers are, and/or to engage in a conversation, and/or answer Luttwak's argument by writing to the New York Times. The "Letters to the Times" e-mail address is: [e-mail]

It would be especially helpful if a prominent Muslim supporter of Obama were to step forward and refute Luttwak's claims.

 

As a community, we should be able to come up with some good answers here. We can send letters to the NYT and promote these answers throughout the blogosphere. Let's get to it!

•  Let's have Obama's back!

  Mojo appreciated.

  by Ian Reifowitz on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:27:42 AM PDT

  •  G2geek had a brilliant response to this yesterday

    ...his/her comment is here.

    by boofdah on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:39:53 AM PDT

•  i'm not a supporter but

  I call bullshit on this article.  He is not automatically muslim.  You have to CHOOSE to become muslim.  He never chose islam.  He was without faith until he chose christianity.

  by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:31:33 AM PDT

  •  LaEscapee and Rich in PA had nothing but praise

    of course, they forgot to apply the same standards of evidence to the editorial that they demanded of the detractors.

    by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:44:09 AM PDT

    •  huh? nt

      by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:46:31 AM PDT

    •  You mean us "freaks"

      Your comprehension is astounding or non-existent. How well versed are you in reading peoples minds? Do you actually beleive there may not be some truth expressed in the argument being made, if so you must agree with what Sullivan and others said when claiming he would be automatically accepted by all Islamists. That is a stupid thought because let me enlighten you a little, it wouldn't matter who or what is elected president, they will still be the leader of the "Great Satan".

      If you can't have an intelligent discussion without proclaiming that other people are some form of enemy then maybe the problem isn't with others.

      Just a thought.

      by LaEscapee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:50:47 AM PDT

      •  the argument being made is based on bullshit

        There are Sunni radicals who think Obama is an Iranian sleeper agent. However, there are not enough of them for this matter.

        Furthermore, there are Americans who believe Obama is a Muslim, but you don't headline "Obama is a Muslim" as fact and then attribute those views to all Americans.

        More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known — as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad.

        Whatever broader point Luttwak was trying to make is rendered wholly irrelevant by:

        1. False assertions about Obama's background.

        2. False assertions about the views of the majority of the world's Muslims.

        3. Ridiculous speculation about how false beliefs about Obama's background would hurt national security.

        How difficult is that for you to comprehend?

        That is a stupid thought because let me enlighten you a little, it wouldn't matter who or what is elected president, they will still be the leader of the "Great Satan".

        Second, you miss the point of his article entirely in your hope that you can spin this sorry bit of Obama-bashing into something salvageable.

        The point of his article wasn't that any of the presidents will have a hard time dealing with the Middle-East, the point of the article was that Obama's alleged status as "apostate" would make him a liability that neither McCain nor Clinton represent.

        This assertion, however, is specious and based on false information.

        So who needs to be enlightened here?

        How about stop patting yourself on the back and actually employ some intellectual standards... yes, even when it comes to Obama-bashing.

        Pathetic.

        by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:59:18 AM PDT

        •  in short

          Luttwak is the one attributing beliefs to "all Muslims," not whoever you imagine he is responding to.

          Furthermore, he is making assertions about Obama's background that aren't true.

          I'm sorry, just because you see Obama bashing doesn't mean you get to pull an inverted strawman.

          You should actually read the article and turn off your Obama hate filter before you lecture me about "comprehension."

          by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:09:43 AM PDT

          •  What isn't true?

            This was asked in the other diary, what in the article about his background isn't true?

            by LaEscapee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:13:07 AM PDT

        •  response from a "Freak"

          I gave bashing any demoicrat when my guy dropped out, it's freeing maybe you should try it.

          You know what the "majority" of muslims in the world think and beleive? I don't think he is talking of the moderates, I think he may reffering to extremists, the tip when he reffered to countries who have and are trying to pass this type of extreme legislation and are not secular.

          Read the article what it does is make a counter argument to what the likes of Sullivan and others suggested when proclaiming that his multi cultural background would have some soothing effect, which is ridiculous. In your efforts to try and discredit, or to comprehend anything not in praise of Obama as attacks you have become blind and deaf to actual reasoning and discussion.

          Hates a terible thing it can effect your health if you let it.

          by LaEscapee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:10:46 AM PDT

          •  I have read the article

            it does not make the argument you claim.

            The argument is not just that extremists will view Obama as an apostate (based on lies that Luttwakk asserts as true), the argument is that the vast majority of Muslims would.

            See here:

            More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obama’s conversion to Christianity once it became widely known

            That right there is a double whammy:

            1. An at least extremely dubious assertion about, and I quote, "most citizens of the Islamic world."

            2. The assertion that Obama converted from Islam to Christianity.

            Again, sorry, even though this is a juicy bit of Obama-bashing, it's bullshit. The article you want to exist doesn't exist. Maybe you should write it, because this asshole sure didn't.

            by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:16:09 AM PDT

            •  ah but

              I think the one you want doesn't exist, see there that is how you have a conversation and debate.

              Let's agree the statement "majority" isn't true, so now can we agree that extremists may feel this way? The Quaran, just like any religious book is interpreted in many ways and laws are drawn from different points of veiw. I honestly didn't read this so much as an "attack" on Obama as on the argument put forward by others.

              Maybe that is the thing, as I am not invested in the he said, she said horserace arguments many things the "beleivers" see as a negative I may see differently. One thing where you lose your argument and standing is when you accuse people of things or start using ad homs just because they have a different point of veiw about something.

              by LaEscapee on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:26:04 AM PDT

            •  and I'll also add

              that Sullivan's argument, which I'm agnostic about, is not based on the assertion that Obama being a former Muslim woul help soft diplomacy. Sullivan, like anyone not shilling for McCain, knows that Obama was never a Muslim.

              Furthermore, I have seen no evidence that supports Luttwak's assertions. He certainly doesn't provide them.

              There has, however, been anecdotal evidence that suggests the opposite.

              Take this excerpt from a recent article on Salon:

              When I was in Tehran, Iran, a year ago, I was asked by several senior government officials, including former President Mohammad Khatami, what to make of Barack Obama's candidacy for president of the United States. The young senator from Illinois was still barely on the international radar then. My response was that I couldn't see Americans nominating, let alone electing, a black man whose middle name was Hussein. My answer, clearly wrong in hindsight, stirred smiles and raised eyebrows among the Iranian leaders because they'd had no idea that Obama had a Muslim father. Even more surprising to them was that he carried, apparently without shame, a Muslim name. From Khatami this elicited an "Ajab!" -- Farsi for, essentially, "You've got to be kidding!" There were also many nods of agreement with my conclusion about Obama's chances.

              by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:30:18 AM PDT

•  already diaried

  here.

  But I support your proposal...

  by Mumon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:32:48 AM PDT

•  I have seen this argument before

  Their thinking is that since Barack's father was raised a Muslim, even though he was an atheist by the time he met Barack's mom, Barack himself was born Muslim, genetically. So the fact that he was raised as a Christian means he left Islam and therefore will be considered apostate and condemned to death.

  I suspect this argument CAN work in the minds of some very funtamentalist Muslims...but wouldn't those fundamentalist Muslims not look very kindly on the president of the United States REGARDLESS of any details in his biography?

  by jenontheshore on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:34:50 AM PDT

  •  I Agree With You 110%, Really A Non-Issue

    those that would argue Obama was born a Muslim would be to the far, far right of their religion and not happy with any US president. Also, in many places and many times Muslims have lived beside (even ruled) people of other faiths without any violence.

    But I also just started reading A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (or listening to the audio version actually) and I am curious what the author has to say on this topic.

    by webranding on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:38:33 AM PDT

  •  IMHO it is to confirm the viral Muslim email

    and has nothing to do with foreign policy

    it is a bullshit argument anyway

    spend your time better doing voter registration for Obama

    by jhpdb on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:41:24 AM PDT

•  Anything

  to keep this half black man from becoming the POTUS. Now more than ever I am ashamed to be from the good old USA (and no, I'm not going anywhere.. my ancestor's hard labor and blood shed will keep me here)

  by biracial1 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:35:27 AM PDT

•  His father was not a Muslim

  he was an atheist, I believe.

  by Snickers77 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:35:35 AM PDT

•  Already wrote a letter to the public editor

  [e-mail]

  by The Bagof Health and Politics on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:37:50 AM PDT

•  Are these the same Muslims that are supposedly

  endorsing him (i.e. Hamas????)

  Surely if Hamas is okay with him ....

  by DemocraticLuntz on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:38:34 AM PDT

  •  Good response. He truly is all things

    to all people. Certainly he is the first islamo-fascist-communist-christian-elitist to ever run for president.

    by the fan man on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:48:36 AM PDT

•  watch out

  this was diaried earlier and the Obama-bashers and Muslim-bashers allied for a field day with it, whining to detractors for "proof" that Luttwak was wrong though Luttwak cites no hard facts in his editorial.

  Here are the facts: Obama's grandfather converted from Catholicism to Islam, though given that this was a village in east Africa, it's unclear how strict and accurate his beliefs were.

  His father may have been raised as a nominal Muslim, but he was either an agnostic or an atheist by the time he reached adulthood.

  Thus, if there is an 'apostate,' it was Obama's father, so it is inaccurate to say Obama was born to a Muslim father. He wasn't. He was born to an agnostic who some may have considered an apostate.

  On top of that, the vast majority of Muslims would not consider the American son of an African atheist to be an "apostate" in the sense that Luttwak, and his Obama-hating and Muslim-bashing apologists, would have us believe.

  by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:39:32 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for that

    we should all use this info in our letters to the times editorial and public editors

    [e-mail]
    [e-mail]

    by betson08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:27:39 AM PDT

•  I'm sitting here with two people who would know..

  My husband - a secular Muslim and my mother-in-law - a practicing Muslim. i asked them about this thinking I could get into a deep discussion about it. they both sort of seemed vaguely interested but after a few moments they started talking about other things. They acknowledged that sure - to some super fundamentalists this might be a problem but to most in the Muslim world it would be a non-issue. In fact, Obama - as POTUS having a link through his family to Islam would be a point of pride to most Muslims.

  by Eyz on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:47:22 AM PDT

  •  fundies would have a problem with full muslim too

    Afterall, al-Queda is not shy about killing muslims.

    by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:53:44 AM PDT

•  First he's TOO Muslim, now he's not Muslim enough

  Can't these assholes at least be consistent in their assholery?

  by Finck II on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:49:29 AM PDT

  •  that's not the point of the article

    I am not in agreement with their conclusion, but that is not even remotely close to the point of the article.

    by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:52:50 AM PDT

    •  The article is part of the overall campaign...

      ...to throw whatever shit about Obama the Right can concoct and see what sticks.  Luttwak is no friend of progressivism, to put it mildly.  Even among his fellow Reaganites, he was known as "Crazy Eddie."

      by Finck II on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:06:11 AM PDT

•  Why is it that prejudice speaks in whispers

  and unfinished thoughts???

  Remember in the great cartoon strip,  Bloom Country... the cockroaches that whisper dark lies in your ear when you are sleeping.

  Such is the nature of Luttwak.

  by crystal eyes on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:52:34 AM PDT

•  Wow. We sure have come full cirlce

  Last year, Bob Kerrey was praising Obama's background, saying the believed it could open up previously closed doors for the United States in the Muslim world. And, the Obamasphere went ballistic when Kerrey was finally questioned about this essay, months later. Now, we have someone essentially challenging Kerrey's premise...and a call to refute this...

  The world never ceases to amaze and surprise me...

  by FischFry on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:53:37 AM PDT

  •  of course, the fact that both essays include lies

    apparently has nothing to do with it.

    But hey, what does the truth matter when you get to self-righteously bash Obama and his supporters?

    Certainly, we can have a debate about whether Obama will be able to enhance America's soft diplomacy, but to do that, we need to drop bullshit lies like "Obama attended a madrassah" and "Obama converted from Islam to Christianity."

    If you're essay spreads malicious lies, it is worthy of outrage, regardless of any valid "point" you may make.

    by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:07:06 AM PDT

    •  Lies? Most abused word on the internet

      Kerrey didn't lie. He was mistaken -- an honest mistake because he thought that the Arabic word for school, "madrassah", was the correct word to use for a secular school in Indonesia. As few people are fluent in Indonesian, it wasn't something he could just ask his neighbor about. He came to the mistake honestly, and it was an honest mistake. There was no malice. If you know all this and continue to call it a lie, then you are the one telling knowing falsehoods -- lies.

      by FischFry on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:45:47 PM PDT

•  Apostasy from Islam not having been very

  common, historically, it well may be the case that most Muslims are indifferent to traditional religious legal norms. And, apparently, a good argument can be made that those traditional legal norms do not have a solid basis in the Koran. See On Apostasy and Islam: 100+ Notable Islamic Voices affirming the Freedom of Faith. But even these Islamic reformers assert:

  Undeniably, the traditional position of Muslim scholars and jurists has been that apostasy [riddah] is punishable by death.

  Regarding the Luttwak op-ed article, the question isn't whether Obama or we ourselves regard him as a Muslim. Of course, we do not. The question rather is whether a significant number of Muslims may be persuaded to regard him as an apostate Muslim by reason of his father's Muslim religious status. And, if so, how that may affect the real world.

  by another American on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:57:19 AM PDT

  •  his father was an agnostic/atheist

    so the question is whether they would consider his father an apostate and, only then, Obama an apostate by extension.

    by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:00:54 AM PDT

    •  Muslim in name

      His father may very well have been an agnostic/atheist in his beliefs. However, in the muslem world you take the religion of your father when you are born, its just how it works.

      So while his father may have never even opened a koran in his life, and may have no idea who mohammed is, he is still considered a muslim by the community and maybe even the government depending on the country.

      The same goes for Obama and since to the muslim world it looks like obama converted from islam to chrisitanity, it is a HUGE crime in islamic countries.

      Even in metropolitan Istanbul, Turkey a lot of turks are agnostic or atheist but according to the government they are muslim. Even though they aren't very religious at all; it is a huge no-no to convert to anything else.

      by morbie5 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:14:21 AM PDT

      •  not necessarily true

        Not all muslims believe you automatically take your father's religion.  In fact, the Koran states that religion cannot be inherited and instead must be chosen.

        by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:18:54 AM PDT

        •  Correct.

          I was just about to make this point. The Koran itself states that religion CANNOT be inherited. To say otherwise is simply false.

          While it 'does' happen in some individual cultures, such things are a matter of local tradition, rather then being rooted in theology.

          by thedarkman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:21:12 AM PDT

          •  Verse(s), please? nt

            by another American on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:28:37 AM PDT

          •  yes it's about patriarchy and inheriting money

            More than it is about inheriting religion.

            by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:32:38 AM PDT

        •  Maybe not all muslims

          Maybe not all muslims, but in most north african and middle eastern counties it is true.

          by morbie5 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:34:31 AM PDT

      •  Most Muslims..

        ..don't really care if you've become a Christian. Christians are still 'people of the book', and Muslims have always believed that they, Christians and Jews worship the same God (Though ironically Islam has much more in common with Jewish religion then Christian, but all three are close in many ways.)

        True, there are places in the world where this is not looked upon fondly, but it has no real Koranic basis, and still represents a minority within the many billions of people who call Islam their faith.

        by thedarkman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:24:14 AM PDT

    •  Three points.

      First, how do we know whether the father apostasized himself from Islam in a way that Islamic legal scholars would consider apostasy?

      Second, the consequences of Obama being considered an apostate from Islam may not be as serious as Luttwak imagines. Carlos Saul Menem, president of Argentina from 1989-1999, converted as an adult from Islam to Roman Catholicism. (The Argentinian constitution required that the president be a Catholic.) Menem did not suffer any problems, including during trips to countries with Muslim majorities. On the other hand, the Menem example doesn't tell us what would have happened if well-regarded Islamic figures had called for religious-based action against Menem. Nor is the president of Argentina in precisely the same position as the President of the United States.

      Third, these are not questions that can be addressed by speculating about motives.

      by another American on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:16:50 AM PDT

•  No matter what religion you are

  Almost everyone else thinks you are going to Hell.
  Most of them think the others are going to Hell too.

  by nytcek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:05:34 AM PDT

  •  No, most religions don't believe in Hell

    That's more true among different Christian and Muslim sects talking about each other than it is among different religions.

    by Dvd Avins on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:59:42 AM PDT

•  The simple truth on the matter.

  Only a small group of fundies are going to look on Obama in negative terms, and even they have no real basis for it, according to the Koran itself.

  Truth is, most Muslims the world over will be proud to see Barack Obama in the White House.

  Not because they think he's a Muslim.

  Not because they think he'll bring down Isreal or some other nonesense.

  No, the darkness of his skin and his name are more then enough, because, as superficial as such things might seem, they also suggest (and Barack's own words confirm this) that he's not going to be another crazy American Cowboy, who doesn't respect them.

  by thedarkman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:06:25 AM PDT

  •  muslims actually like that he is black nt

    by sunshineonthebay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:07:28 AM PDT

•  To quote Cameron from Ferris Bueller's day off...

  Luttwak writes:

  As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.

  He argues that it does not matter than neither Obama nor his father thought of themselves as Muslims.  The Islamic world thinks he is a Muslim, so he is.  

  I have one for Mr. Luttwak.  "Pardon my French, but you're an asshole! Asshole!"

  See, I think he is an asshole, so he is one.

  by dstein12 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:08:23 AM PDT

  •  not only does he make that claim

    his article implies that Obama himself converted from Islam to Christianity.

    He also claims that, despite what his apologists may claim, the vast majority of the Muslim world would view Obama as an apostate based on this loose association.

    Both are false, but of course, the Obama haters and Muslim-bashers are beyond reason.

    by Stroszek on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:11:47 AM PDT

•  My ex-boss is Muslim

  And has advocated for Obama for months now. I think this is a non-issue. If anything his background is a a strength because he straddles two worlds and can speak to both of them.

  by smellybeast on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:15:26 AM PDT

•  pure BS

  Obama did not 'convert' from anything. Sure extremist flakes like Luttwak and AL-Qaeda will try and make the claim because they hate and fear what Obama represents. But the majority of the Muslim world will see Obama's history, his family and his positive message of working together with our allies as a very positive and welcome change.

  Right wing hate groups like to conflate the small number of extremists with a billion Muslims and Islam with the warped fundamentalism of terrorist's but that is just a sick slander against a large segment of the world's population.

  by hankg on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:37:13 AM PDT

•  That ad was utterly ridiculous

  It is amazing what people can do with words.  Anyway, the Muslim world doesn't dictate who our president should be.  Mind the stupid author that the Muslim World ain't too fond of George Bush either.  And why do people keep projecting Mr. Obama as a Muslim?  He's an American Christian.  He keeps telling you that.  He was worked over for a whole month in the media about it.  Now, NY Post, stop being stupid.

  by publicv on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:37:29 PM PDT

  •  correcton NY Times not NY Post

    by publicv on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:38:00 PM PDT