There’s something that’s been nagging me in the back of my head since I learned how popular Barack Obama was, not only in Kenya or Africa but all over the Nation of Islam. I chose not to talk about the matter publicly, since I was afraid that it might wake up some radical clerics, who could give fanatics bad ideas. I now realize that it’s such an obvious point that they couldn’t have possibly overlooked it. Besides, they don’t read my blog, do they? So I don’t see any harm if I post here.
First, the reasons for Mr. Obama’s popularity: Obviously, he’s not President Bush, and that helps everywhere, not just in the Nation of Islam. But just as important, if not more so, is his paternity: He is the biological son of a Black African and the stepson of an Indonesian, both fathers being from Islamic communities.
My use of the term “from Islamic communities” is deliberate. Although Mr. Obama’s fathers grew up as Moslems, his Kenyan biological fathre was a Moslem turned atheist, and his Indonesian stepfather’s personal relationship with the Islamic religion appears to have been tenuous at best. His fathers were apostates.
Now I am no scholar of Islam (or anything else, actually), but I’ve been given to understand that apostasy is the greatest crime against God that a Moslem can commit. In fact, according to most Islamic schools of jurisprudence, an adult male apostate must be executed. Mr. Obama is likely in a somewhat better situation than his fathers, since he did turn to Christianity, placing him among the “People of the Book” (which, as you know, also includes Jews and Sabeans). Still, if he had been a Muslim at any point before that, though at most a highly unobservant one, he would, I suspect, still be considered an apostate. At a minimum, his nature/nurture is nothing to boast about, and it is clear that he has failed to redress his fathers’sins.
All this must be Islam 101. So why are learned Mullahs and Imams silent on this point?
My guess is that the average Moslem man-in-the-street could care less—they’re just happy that there’s a non-Bush who opposed the invasion of Iraq who, very broadly speaking, also happens to be one of us in more ways than one. In fact, I couldn’t find any Obama questions on the English-language Ask the Imam websites that I visited. There could be serious anti-Obama chatter on Arab-language websites or radical Islam forum that I’m completely missing, but wouldn’t we be hearing about that if there was?
My guess is, the street and the bazaars like Mr. Obama, and the religious forces are not going to press a point that would make them unhappy. Apparently, Islamic clerics bow to the desires of the laic too. That’s heartening. You know, Chris Hitchens shouldn’t be so alarmed.*
* Okay, maybe he’s just congenitally angry.
I know so little about this entire field, so you’ll be doing me a great favor if you can tell me anything I don’t know about this, even, or particularly, if it makes me look like an idiot.
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Friday, August 24, 2007
More on the Khalil Gibran International Academy
I took note of it here. WaPo now says In New York, a Word Starts a Firestorm. Reading the article, it is apparent that it was more like the lynching party finally catching up with the victim. With an Orthodox Jew who doesn't understand Arabic now charge, it' s hard to escape the impression that the New York authorities are waiting for the school to whither and fade away. Assume you were a Muslim and thinking of sending your child there. What would you do now?
So I guess my rhetorical question is: Will any American of note come to Ms. Almontazeri's defense? The school's? Not if Dr. Pipes, who has obviously learned well from his many years of studying the USSR, has his way:
"Daniel Pipes, a pro-Israel conservative who created Campus Watch, a Web site dedicated to exposing alleged bias in university Middle East-studies programs, wrote in the New York Sun that the school would cause problems because "learning Arabic in [and] of itself promotes an Islamic outlook."
Would there be an outcry in the US if someone opposed teaching Hebrew in schools, saying, "learning Hebrew in and of itself promotes a Jewish outlook"?
And then I wonder, am I any different from these people?
So I guess my rhetorical question is: Will any American of note come to Ms. Almontazeri's defense? The school's? Not if Dr. Pipes, who has obviously learned well from his many years of studying the USSR, has his way:
"Daniel Pipes, a pro-Israel conservative who created Campus Watch, a Web site dedicated to exposing alleged bias in university Middle East-studies programs, wrote in the New York Sun that the school would cause problems because "learning Arabic in [and] of itself promotes an Islamic outlook."
Would there be an outcry in the US if someone opposed teaching Hebrew in schools, saying, "learning Hebrew in and of itself promotes a Jewish outlook"?
And then I wonder, am I any different from these people?
Monday, August 13, 2007
Head of City's Arabic School Steps Down Under Pressure
Head of City's Arabic School Steps Down Under Pressure
The principal of New York City's first public school dedicated to the study of Arabic language and culture resigned under pressure yesterday, days after she was quoted defending the use of the word "intifada" as a T-shirt slogan.
Debbie Almontaser, a veteran public school teacher, stepped down as the principal of Khalil Gibran International Academy, a middle school that is to open this fall in Brooklyn.
…
Ms. Almontaser's remarks, made last weekend, were in response to questions from The Post over the phrase "Intifada NYC," which was printed on T-shirts sold by Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media, a Brooklyn-based organization. The shirts have no relation to her school.
"The word basically means 'shaking off,' " Ms. Almontaser told the paper. "That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic."
Ms. Almontaser may not have been condoning the violence that the Palestinians unleashed in the occupied territories, but her views on the righteousness of their cause were evident.
In her defense, the West has never faced up to the fact that Israel remains the only final solution to a European problem that the Allies imposed on the colonies*. If nothing else, the Arab media will surely seize on the fact that the other people in article, Joel I. Klein, the school commissioner, Michael R. Bloomberg, the mayor, Randi Weingarten, the president of the United Federation of Teachers, are Jewish.
* Europe settled the better part of its internal accounts in the 20th Century through territorial concessions and what would now be called ethnic cleansing. The post-WW II Soviet takeover glazed over some faults that ruptured when the empire came apart in the nineties.
The principal of New York City's first public school dedicated to the study of Arabic language and culture resigned under pressure yesterday, days after she was quoted defending the use of the word "intifada" as a T-shirt slogan.
Debbie Almontaser, a veteran public school teacher, stepped down as the principal of Khalil Gibran International Academy, a middle school that is to open this fall in Brooklyn.
…
Ms. Almontaser's remarks, made last weekend, were in response to questions from The Post over the phrase "Intifada NYC," which was printed on T-shirts sold by Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media, a Brooklyn-based organization. The shirts have no relation to her school.
"The word basically means 'shaking off,' " Ms. Almontaser told the paper. "That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic."
Ms. Almontaser may not have been condoning the violence that the Palestinians unleashed in the occupied territories, but her views on the righteousness of their cause were evident.
In her defense, the West has never faced up to the fact that Israel remains the only final solution to a European problem that the Allies imposed on the colonies*. If nothing else, the Arab media will surely seize on the fact that the other people in article, Joel I. Klein, the school commissioner, Michael R. Bloomberg, the mayor, Randi Weingarten, the president of the United Federation of Teachers, are Jewish.
* Europe settled the better part of its internal accounts in the 20th Century through territorial concessions and what would now be called ethnic cleansing. The post-WW II Soviet takeover glazed over some faults that ruptured when the empire came apart in the nineties.
Monday, September 18, 2006
The Pope May Or May Not Be Infallible, But He Can Certainly Be a Fool
If the Pope's reference to Islam in his University of Regensburg address had been taken out of context, then it was because the reference itself stuck out like a sore thumb. The Pope's turgid rehash of well-known arguments concerning faith and reason (the good Dr. Jean-Yves Pranchère introduced me to Isaiah Berlin, who provides easily digestible accounts on this issue) was intended almost solely "to raise the question of God through the use of reason, and to do so in the context of the tradition of the Christian faith: this, within the university". There is little to indicate that he wished to use the occasion to initiate an ecumenical debate on the role of reason in religion, as his words that the address was "an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with mutual respect" between, specifically, the people of the book, as Muslims call them. Instead, the address makes it clear that the Pope is interested only in the developments within the Christian Church. Thus, the reference to an argument by a Byzantine emperor against Islam on the basis of its "conversion by violence" can be only charitably characterized as gratuitous.
But my greatest disappointment is directed at his statement that "I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address……, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims". The Pope has responded with what has now become the boilerplate, litigation-averse, "I'm sorry if you were offended"non-apology. I had hoped that the Catholic Church learned its lesson from its pederasty pandemic that what might work with the profane does not necessarily work with the sacred.
The rabble-rousing in the Islamic Nation is disturbing, if predictable,. They victimize the vulnerable, doing the Islamic equivalent of kicking nuns. And some of the response from the radical Islamic leadership is pathetic. Still, I expected something better from the Holy See, of all places.
もし、法王がレーゲンスブルグ大学での講演で行なった回教への言及が全体の趣旨を無視して引用されていたとしたら、それは、言及自体が全体の趣旨からまったく遊離していたからです。法王は、よく知られている新興と理性との関係に関する議論（reason (ジャン＝イーヴ・プランシェール博士 Jean-Yves Pranchèreが紹介してくれたアイゼイア・バーリンが、この問題についてわかりやすい論文をいくつも書いています)を冗長に反芻したわけですが、それは、ほとんど「理性の活用によって神の問題を提起し、それを、本学において、キリスト教の信仰という範囲の中において行なう」ことに終始しました。「相互に尊重しあいながら率直かつ真摯な対話を呼びかける」という釈明文のセリフが示唆するようにこの機会を彼が利用して宗教における理性の役割について汎宗教的な議論を巻き起こそうというような意図を感じさせるものは、ほとんどありません。演説は、むしろ、法王がキリスト教会の中での事態の展開にのみ関心を持っていることを明らかにしています。従って、東ローマ帝国の皇帝が回教に対して行なった「暴力による改宗」の非難への言及は、よく言って余計なお世話です。
だが、私が本当にがっかりしたのは、彼が「私の講演の中の数行で回教徒の感情を傷つけるものであるとみなされたものについていくつかの国においてあった反応について、深く残念に思うものである」と述べたことにあります。法王は、典型的な訴訟防衛型の、決まり文句的に言えば「あなたが傷ついたと思ったことを遺憾に思う」という応答要領で応えました。カトリック教会は、対児童猥褻の蔓延の始末で、世俗なら通用するかもの知れないことが、神聖世界では、必ずしも上手くいくとは限らないという教訓を学んだはずだったのに。
イスラム世界における大衆煽動は、予想されたこととは言え、心穏やかに見守っているわけにはいきません。それは、弱者に八つ当たりするものであり、いわゆるkicking nunsのイスラム版です。そして、イスラム過激派のリーダー達から聞こえてくる反応には、惨めとしか言いようのないものもあります。しかし、よりにもよってカトリック教会の長からは、もう少しましなことを期待したのですが。
But my greatest disappointment is directed at his statement that "I wish also to add that I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address……, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims". The Pope has responded with what has now become the boilerplate, litigation-averse, "I'm sorry if you were offended"non-apology. I had hoped that the Catholic Church learned its lesson from its pederasty pandemic that what might work with the profane does not necessarily work with the sacred.
The rabble-rousing in the Islamic Nation is disturbing, if predictable,. They victimize the vulnerable, doing the Islamic equivalent of kicking nuns. And some of the response from the radical Islamic leadership is pathetic. Still, I expected something better from the Holy See, of all places.
もし、法王がレーゲンスブルグ大学での講演で行なった回教への言及が全体の趣旨を無視して引用されていたとしたら、それは、言及自体が全体の趣旨からまったく遊離していたからです。法王は、よく知られている新興と理性との関係に関する議論（reason (ジャン＝イーヴ・プランシェール博士 Jean-Yves Pranchèreが紹介してくれたアイゼイア・バーリンが、この問題についてわかりやすい論文をいくつも書いています)を冗長に反芻したわけですが、それは、ほとんど「理性の活用によって神の問題を提起し、それを、本学において、キリスト教の信仰という範囲の中において行なう」ことに終始しました。「相互に尊重しあいながら率直かつ真摯な対話を呼びかける」という釈明文のセリフが示唆するようにこの機会を彼が利用して宗教における理性の役割について汎宗教的な議論を巻き起こそうというような意図を感じさせるものは、ほとんどありません。演説は、むしろ、法王がキリスト教会の中での事態の展開にのみ関心を持っていることを明らかにしています。従って、東ローマ帝国の皇帝が回教に対して行なった「暴力による改宗」の非難への言及は、よく言って余計なお世話です。
だが、私が本当にがっかりしたのは、彼が「私の講演の中の数行で回教徒の感情を傷つけるものであるとみなされたものについていくつかの国においてあった反応について、深く残念に思うものである」と述べたことにあります。法王は、典型的な訴訟防衛型の、決まり文句的に言えば「あなたが傷ついたと思ったことを遺憾に思う」という応答要領で応えました。カトリック教会は、対児童猥褻の蔓延の始末で、世俗なら通用するかもの知れないことが、神聖世界では、必ずしも上手くいくとは限らないという教訓を学んだはずだったのに。
イスラム世界における大衆煽動は、予想されたこととは言え、心穏やかに見守っているわけにはいきません。それは、弱者に八つ当たりするものであり、いわゆるkicking nunsのイスラム版です。そして、イスラム過激派のリーダー達から聞こえてくる反応には、惨めとしか言いようのないものもあります。しかし、よりにもよってカトリック教会の長からは、もう少しましなことを期待したのですが。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)