RELIGION NEWS SERVICE
Sharifa Alkhateeb, president of the Muslim Education Council, says that whenever she meets elected officials, she urges them to add Muslim names and places to their speeches.
Posted on 06/21/2003 2:11:24 PM PDT by Dubya
As Muslim groups push for Americans to add "Islamic" to the phrase "Judeo-Christian," the argument about how to describe our values heats up
Leading Muslim organizations say it's time for Americans to stop using the phrase "Judeo-Christian" when describing the values and character that define the United States.
Better choices, they say, are "Judeo-Christian-Islamic" or "Abrahamic," referring to Abraham, the patriarch held in common by the monotheistic big three religions.
The new language should be used "in all venues where we normally talk about Judeo-Christian values, starting with the media, academia, statements by politicians and comments made in churches, synagogues and other places," said Agha Saeed, founder and chairman of the American Muslim Alliance, a political group with headquarters in Fremont, Calif.
Other national Muslim groups supporting a change include the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim American Society and the American Muslim Council.
The budding movement is largely unformed, and religion watchers question whether it will succeed. Still, the call for new terms shows that words carry huge symbolic importance for Muslims trying to find their role in a post-9-11 and post-Iraq-war America.
"These are not just let's-make-you-feel-good words," Saeed said. "These are words that define how we're related to each other."
Others take offense, arguing that to alter the phrase "Judeo-Christian" is political correctness and revisionist history at its worst.
"A lot of the ideas that underpin civil liberties come from Judeo-Christian theology," said the Rev. Ted Haggard of Colorado Springs, Colo., president of the National Association of Evangelicals. "What the Islamic community needs to make are positive contributions to culture and society so we can include them."
Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, said a "Judeo-Christian understanding of things like freedom of conscience and liberty" are embodied in the Constitution. "No offense intended," he said, "but Muslims weren't a part of that, even though they're part of the discussion now."
The conflict illustrates the power of words, especially those touching on religion, national history and identity.
In a 2002 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for People and the Press, two-thirds of respondents said they consider the United States a "Christian nation" and 58 percent said the strength of American society is based on the religious faith of its people.
But only 14 percent said it is essential that a person believe in "basic Judeo-Christian values" in order to be a good American.
From its founding to the late 1940s, the United States was commonly described as Christian.
According to a 1984 scholarly article by religion writer Mark Silk, "Judeo-Christian" wasn't used to refer to a common American outlook of values and beliefs until World War II, when the supposedly Christian Nazis and their death camps made future references to "our Christian civilization" sound ominously exclusive.
" 'Judeo-Christian,' which in 1952 looked like an incredibly inclusive term, doesn't look very inclusive now," said Silk, director of the Greenberg Center for the Study of Religion in Public Life at Trinity College, in Hartford, Conn. "So we probably need a new term."
But, Silk acknowledged, "I think Judeo-Christian-Islamic is going to be hard for the public to accept at this moment when you've just had people attacking the United States in the name of Islam."
While "Judeo-Christian" may not be used with the frequency heard in the 1950s, it's still a part of the vernacular.
The movement to drop or change the phrase has some non-Muslim support, including the head of the National Council of Churches.
The Rev. Bob Edgar, general secretary of the council, which represents 36 Christian denominations, said he prefers "Abrahamic" to "Judeo-Christian-Islamic" because it "rolls off the tongue a little easier."
"The more inclusive we can be, the more committed we are to the founding fathers and mothers who struggled with the issue of respect for each other's religious faiths," Edgar said.
Other arguments for change are:
• Numbers. The U.S. Muslim population is growing. Estimates are disputed but range as high as 7 million. (The Jewish-population estimate is 5 million.)
"Muslims are here, and there are 7 million of them, even though they're largely invisible to most Americans," said Saeed. "This necessitates some discussion about language."
• Commonality. Even though many people emphasize the differences, Islam has similarities with Christianity and Judaism.
"We believe in heaven and hell, in doing good deeds, in following the Ten Commandments," said Hannah Hawk, a spokeswoman for the Houston Muslim Public Affairs Council. "Islamic values are not only compatible with American values, they're almost identical. I, personally, believe the most Islamic country in the world is America, where we believe in freedom of religion, freedom of the press and equality of all."
• Diplomacy. When President Bush mentions "churches and synagogues," he's quick to add "mosques," but many Islamic nations still perceive the United States as a Christian country bent on dominating Muslims in a modern-day crusade. An inclusive change of language could alter that view, said Zahid Bukhari, director of Muslims in the American Public Square at Washington's Georgetown University.
"It would convey a very positive message that it's not an issue of us vs. them because Muslims are here," Bukhari said.
• History. Some assert that African Muslims were among the slaves brought to America. In addition, some argue that Islamic ideas helped shape the European West, which produced the values cherished by the Constitution's framers.
"What we call Western culture is in fact based on Muslim Middle East culture, but the average American doesn't know that," said Sharifa Alkhateeb, president of the Washington-based Muslim Education Council.
Alkhateeb, a consultant for textbook companies and school systems across the country, doesn't like "Judeo-Christian-Islamic" because it excludes other minority religions. But she finds "Judeo-Christian" as outdated as calling pluralism and multiculturalism "just having blacks and whites together."
Every time she meets public officials, whether Secretary of State Colin Powell or a small-town legislator, she asks them to include Muslim names and places in their speeches.
"It's exactly in those little things that people gain recognition as human beings or lose it," said Alkhateeb, who is also the founder of the North American Council for Muslim Women. "The Jewish movement in this country made people allergic to mention even a single word that could possibly be construed as anti-Jewish, and people don't even think about such words, much less speak them, now.
"How did that happen? One inch at a time, exactly as Muslims are trying to change the language now."
Osama Siblani, an influential voice among American Muslims and publisher of the Arab-American News in Dearborn, Mich., takes an even broader view.
"I believe we should call this the United States of America, made up of Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, Jews and others," said Siblani. "This stuff about language has to stop. We are all just Americans."
RELIGION NEWS SERVICE
Sharifa Alkhateeb, president of the Muslim Education Council, says that whenever she meets elected officials, she urges them to add Muslim names and places to their speeches.
There is NOTHING Islamic about my values.
ML/NJ (American)
No it doesn't. There. Hope that clarifies things. Next issue?
There is absolutely zippo relationship between Judeo-Christian civilization (aka Western civilization) and Islam. As a matter of fact, the modern radical Islamic code is to destroy every hint of Judeo-Christian/Western civilization, tradition, and thought.
These people are delusional, but they seem to be succeeding in the culture of victimization.
The other half of the argument is that Muslims who convert to other religions are guilty of apostasy (which carries an automatic sentence of death). Same penalty to anyone who attempts to induce a Muslim into apostasy.
Yeah, they share our Judeo-Christian sense of freedom and liberty. </SARCASM>
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.