Talks Like a Christian, Sounds like a Christian…
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT EASTER PRAYER BREAKFAST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you. Please, please have a seat.
….
To all the faith leaders and the distinguished guests that are here today, welcome to our second annual — I’m going to make it annual, why not? (Laughter and applause.) Our second Easter Prayer Breakfast. The Easter Egg Roll, that’s well established. (Laughter.) The Prayer Breakfast we started last year, in part because it gave me a good excuse to bring together people who have been such extraordinary influences in my life and such great friends. And it gives me a chance to meet and make some new friends here in the White House.
I wanted to host this breakfast for a simple reason -– because as busy as we are, as many tasks as pile up, during this season, we are reminded that there’s something about the resurrection — something about the resurrection of our savior, Jesus Christ, that puts everything else in perspective.
We all live in the hustle and bustle of our work. And everybody in this room has weighty responsibilities, from leading churches and denominations, to helping to administer important government programs, to shaping our culture in various ways. And I admit that my plate has been full as well. (Laughter.) The inbox keeps on accumulating. (Laughter.)
But then comes Holy Week. The triumph of Palm Sunday. The humility of Jesus washing the disciples’ feet. His slow march up that hill, and the pain and the scorn and the shame of the cross.
And we’re reminded that in that moment, he took on the sins of the world — past, present and future — and he extended to us that unfathomable gift of grace and salvation through his death and resurrection.
In the words of the book Isaiah: “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.”
This magnificent grace, this expansive grace, this “Amazing Grace” calls me to reflect. And it calls me to pray. It calls me to ask God for forgiveness for the times that I’ve not shown grace to others, those times that I’ve fallen short. It calls me to praise God for the gift of our son — his Son and our Savior.
And that’s why we have this breakfast. Because in the middle of critical national debates, in the middle of our busy lives, we must always make sure that we are keeping things in perspective. Children help do that. (Laughter.) A strong spouse helps do that. But nothing beats scripture and the reminder of the eternal…..
I voted for President Obama, so this isn’t a specific criticism, more a general observation that most politicians can talk and sound like Christians when it suits them.
Certainly it’s a nice speech. I have no doubt it’s sincere.
On the other hand, those who think Obama is the most pro-abortion president ever aren’t going to read this quite so charitably, I think.
“Talks Like a Christian, Sounds like a Christian…”
Obama is definitely a Christian. After all, he sat at the feet of his mentor, the vile racist Jeremiah Wright for 20 years. Hopefully, Obama was not listening to the sermons very carefully.
Re: the implication in the post’s heading regarding the Birther movement: the question remains as to why his stubborn refusal to release the original birth certificate. I’m guessing it is not because he was not born in Hawaii, but because the actual document will clearly state that Obama’s father was a Muslim. And, under Islam, that makes Obama…”talks like a Muslim, sounds like a Muslim”…
So, Obama is not a Muslim. He is an apostate Muslim. Good thing we don’t have sharia law here in the USA…yet.
Now Jean!! look what you’ve done! Pushed all the buttons of the person who styles himself P Flanagan.
Continuing the ancient pagan ritual of the Easter Egg Roll seems pretty damning to me!
I think PF’s post was genuinely offensive and judgemental and non-Christian.
That is how ugly the divided politics of this country has become.
I though tanout the Orange XCounty poster/birther/unknowing racist(?) who kept tell9ing us what a good Christian woman she was.
Much talk here of educated catholics and Chrisitans, bu tlittle sign of it in the political theology I’m hearing (especially from our usual suspects.)
William,
On that basis you should not watch, listen, nor read about the Yankee game tonight.
WC: Are you suggesting he’s partial to the cult of Ôstarâ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%92ostre
I will never get used to this country’s political leaders talking as if they were faith leaders. Am I also supposed to start teaching my computer science students about the Christian faith in class or in office hours? Mixing topics and roles in such a way would be unacceptable, wouldn’t it? Why is it ok for a president to start preaching, and, moreover, preaching with distinctly Christian ideas, thus ignoring those among US citizens who are not Christian? Isn’t it disrespectful of US religious minorities?
But I fear that no one here will understand my reaction. In that respect the US is truly an alien country to this Frenchwoman.
“So, Obama is not a Muslim. He is an apostate Muslim.”
Good thing he thought to disguise his unfortunate middle name. Otherwise, people would really start to wonder.
No, Margaret, I’m suggesting that he’s partial to the Cult of Confectioners, which targets children and Lenten abstainers like me.
The C of C’s web URL reveals their hegemonic non-Christian designs:
http://www.candyusa.com/
;)
Claire: You’re right most people in this country will not understand your reaction. Though everyone would be surprised if you started teaching your computer students anything but computer studies.
Claire, I agree! I think presidents and all politicians should keep their religious beliefs, if any, in the closet, as Jesus directed so clearly.
Separation of church/mosque/synagogue/temple/grove and state!
I remember when the words “under God” were forced into the Pledge of Allegiance, destroying the cadence of the thing.
As to the birth certificate? I don’t think humans inherit religion in their DNA. What is on some birth certificates that some people may prefer to keep private is information about whether there was a multiple birth — that they were one of two or more, and perhaps the others were stillborn.
Since we’ll have a gay president before we’ll have an atheist or “none,” it’s unlikely that politicians will keep their religion in the closet….
I second Claire’s emotion. I’m very uncomfortable with the President as Pray-er role that has increasingly come to be demanded of our presidents–especially because what’s demanded is a Christian leader. I don’t doubt (or care if) Obama is a Christian–but I can’t help but sense he feels he has no choice but to perform it for us over and over and over, because of the unreasonable suspicions and expectations of certain citizens who hold his skin color and his father’s upbringing against him.
When that whackjob Orange County woman justifies her racism by declaring she’s a good Christian and Sarkozy’s statements about France’s Christian heritage help whip Catholics into destroying art they don’t like, images of politicians leading “national” prayer breakfasts, lunches, or anything leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/andres-serrano-piss-christ-destroyed-christian-protesters?cat=world&type=article
Gerelyn: you go right ahead and tell fungelical politcos that they should keep anything “in the closet” and see how far you get with THAT ONE!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/us/19gays.html?scp=2&sq=erik%20eckholm&st=cse
Since we’ll have a gay president before we’ll have an atheist or “none,” it’s unlikely that politicians will keep their religion in the closet….
———-
Margaret, I think we’ve already had at least one “gay president”, although given the different attitudes about same-sex affection, bed-sharing, etc. in the 19th century, it’s hard to say. There may have been several.
But I don’t see the connection. Surely no president who is homosexual will see the need to hold breakfasts at which to prate about her orientation.
My agreement with Claire is implicit in my response. Politicians may be completely sincere in what they say about religion, but whenever they start banging away about Jesus, it always looks like self-serving PR to me. Maybe it does to God, too, and that’s why all those prayers that open Congress never seem to do any good.
Margaret, I must protest about pushing Flanagan’s buttons. I had a stove one time that short-circuited and the buttons on it just kept turning themselves on and off at random. In any case, I didn’t say nothin’ about Obama’s birth certificate, Jeremiah Wright, Muslim apostasy or sharia law.
William, your link reminds me that I used to tell my baby brother that the speckled eggs and jelly beans were rotten and he’d better give them all to me so I could dispose of them appropriately. Which I did. So I wasn’t lying.
I also told him there was no Santy Claus when he was five. He didn’t believe me, so I made him look in the window where Dad was sneaking the presents under the tree. Also not a lie.
Another time I told him everything he was getting for his birthday. All true.
Sadly, my parents gave me what for after all those incidents. Sigh. It just doesn’t pay to speak truth to power sometimes.
Nations and their attitude toward religion(s) are complicated, no doubt. I don’t think every U.S. politician who prays aloud or cites Jesus or whomever, is a hypocrite, nor necessarily using their religious beliefs for nefarious purposes. Obama’s remarks seemed fitting for the occasion and brief (since someone else was the official prayerer). And he managed as many African-Americans do to fit it all in with grace and a sense of humor…
And thinking of nation’s and their attitudes toward religion, take France. They have banned face coverings on Islamic women in public, and now they will have a face veil police, etc. I am no fan of face veils or floor to pony tail covering of women, but I’m happy to live in a country where more or less everyone can wear anything they want, for whatever reason. President Sarkozy went off the deep “religious” (laicisme) end on this, imho.
Yes, fundies of various types are scary when they have power. But better to know just which way they are heading than not to know. And why shouldn’t they pray with like-minded people? When a fundie is president (e.g., Dubya), the White House is also their home.
The notion that religion as such is generally a threat to civic values doesn’t hold water. For religious people, religious beliefs and civic principles are often one and the same. Everyone, religious and secular, should feel free to say what we think is relevant, and if those sayings include prayings, I say, why not? I might not like some of them, e.g., some Muslim prayers, but either you truly believe in freedom of religion or you don’t. If a particular group is plotting to overthrow the government, then that breaks a law. But that’s quite different. And by discourageing such people from saying what they really think, we force them underground.
We shouldn’t try to shut up the seculars either when they criticize the rest of us. If they were discouraged from expressing their criticisms, we might never know what our faults are :-)
No, religion doesn’t belong in a math class because the two kinds of truths are unrelated. But some consideration of some religious beliefs does belong in some classes, e.g., the English novel or Shakespeare, and certainly in history and in certain sociology classes and other social sciences.
As I see it, this disbarring of religion from public discourses of all sorts is what the extreme seculars are aiming at, and the reason is obvious: when people know nothing about religion they won’t be tempted to believe. Dawkins et al are Big Brothers, they are, they are.
The only French I can spiel off now is the Hail Mary , learned in my HS French class 64 years ago… Claire??. (-:
Ann
I agree expression of religious belief shouldn’t be barred from political discourse and I also agree civic and religious values aren’t inconsistent per se. I don’t think you have much to worry about re the gnu atheists (in terms of what they can actually accomplish). Sometimes, I fear things are so far toward the other end of the spectrum that a politician has not much choice but to claim s/he’s a Christian in order to avoid political problems. Expressions of belief don’t bother me, what bugs me is the expectation is for those expressions to be Christian. And yes, I’m a cynical gal, but I’m sure there was a conversation about whether Obama should mention the Jewish Passover in today’s speech. Frankly, I think his personality and inclinations are such that he would have, but political reality dictated otherwise. Maybe not. I’m a suspicious type ;)
Public prayers usually invite hypocrisy or lying. People who don’t believe will lead or participate in a prayer since it is expected. Politicians always exploited God for gainful reasons. Ronald Reagan did the ultimate prostitution when he invited fundamentals onto the national scene when he said: “I know you cannot endorse me. But I endorse you.” Clever and opportunistic. Those words gave us Robertson, Falwell, Chaput and myriad other exploiters. The irony is politics allowed W. Bush to stress that we have honorable Muslim citizens while Obama does not have the option, as it were.
The best politics is Matthew 25:36-41. But that is more apt for the celestial electorate.
The Obama’s held a seder on the first night of Passover for their friends and co-workers. Seders are wonderful communal events. An Easter Prayer Breakfast isn’t exactly the Christian equivalent but having celebrated Passover the night before, perhaps Obama felt no need to say anything; it would have been redundant.
Let us also take note of Joseph Lieberman, Jewish and active; and Keith Ellison, Muslim and active; and those Catholics who dare not say too much about it, lest some bishop reprimand them (e.g., Nancy Pelosi and Joseph Biden). The matter of religion and politics is quite complicated; banning talk of religion in politics is futile and counter-productive. It’s not so hard to spot the hypocrites and easy enough to see those who gracefully integrate their civic and religious values in their votes.
I am not sure the French have the whole secular chuch/state relationship as neatly stitched. Afterall every president including Chirac and now Sarkozy are made and have accepted being THE Honorary Canon at the Lateran Basilica which is reserved to French leaders. So due to quirks of history and tradition, technically, you have actual Roman Catholic clerics serving as presidents of the head of state in France
While the USA can be faulted for some things, the USA has created the best church/model state in the modern world. It is no accident that John Courtney Murray was an American and the document, Dignitatis Humanae, is clearly, culturally, an American inspired document.
Mary –
Yes, the expectation that the expressions be Christian is bad, and the expectation shows prejudice. But all the more reason for people to speak out from their own traditions. Consider the harm that was done by the Moral Majority people who plastered the country with their version of Christianity. They did it so well that now a large segment of the kids of that generation seem to think that the fundies’ beliefs are typical of all Christians’ beliefs. All the more reason for the rest of us to speak out.
Ann/Margaret–thanks, I appreciate your more measured “take” on the matter.
One of the more interesting religion/politics factoids that has always fascinated me, but not enough to investigate, is Orrin Hatch’s (R.-UT) views of abortion. Now a fully confirmed tea partier and once a conservative, Hatch has seemed to oppose various pieces of pro-life legislation. I have understood that is because Mormon theology see the embryo/fetus in a different light than Christians. Anybody know better? or know more?
Various colleagues who have been/are LDS have told me this: the Mormon Church hasn’t taken an “official” position regarding “when life begins.” They oppose abortion for convenience sake but in statements have accepted the validity of exceptions for rape/incest, life/health of mom, or when defect/disease makes it unlikely fetus would survive much past birth. It is a matter not to be taken lightly, but left to individual conscience.
Interestingly, Mormons do not conduct a Temple Ordinance for stillbirths. There’s also some theology regarding ensoulment and breathing–based in part on LDS Scripture wherein an unborn Jesus speaks to a prophet one day prior to His birth.
(Disclaimer: I’m not LDS and can’t account for the orthodoxy of my Mormon friends :)
“I also told him there was no Santy Claus when he was five. He didn’t believe me, so I made him look in the window where Dad was sneaking the presents under the tree.”
And is he scarred for life? :-)
Fine words by the President, but with an election looming, one is perhaps forgiven for suspecting ulterior motives. The real test will be whether he can still say them in 5 1/2 years when he no longer holds elective office. (My bet is, he can and will).
PF: tell me what I am missing. I went to this link ( He is an apostate Muslim.) and all I got was a video of a second-rate “singer” who is a lousy lip-syncher and a poor dancer. He was surrounded by moderately talented distractors from his ineptness (the black guy was good) but what does any of that have to do with BO bein an “apostate Muslim?”
Margaret–
LDS policy on abortions is slightly more liberal than Catholic policy on the procedure. As far as I know, Hatch adheres to SDL policy on the issue. I recall that Hatch co-sponsored (with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) a restrictive abortion amendment in the Senate health care bill.
Where Hatch parts with some pro-lifers (including me) is that he supports destructive embryonic stem cell research. He distinguishes abortion and ESCR as follows: the former destroys lives, the latter saves life. I think this distinction is simplistic. True, ESCR may have the potential to save lives, but only as the result of destroying the nascent lives that provided the miracle cells upon which cures may be crafted.
Sorry, forgot the link to LDS policy on abortion:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_abor.htm
And that should be “Hatch adheres to LDS policy on the issue.”
When I have a question about Mormon beliefs and practices, I go here:
http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon_shorts.htm
Speed-scrolling down the list of Short Topics, I don’t see one about abortion. It doesn’t seem to be a big issue.
I suspect that abortion is not a big issue for Mormons because they want huge families.
“abortion clinic Utah” yields about 90,000 hits on Google.
JP: Ergo???
@12.36 pm: Distractors s/b detractors
Margaret: I suspect that Mormonism innoculates one from the temptation to get an abortion about as well as Catholicism.
“And is he scarred for life? :-)”
I was scarred for life when our kindergarten teacher said we would have a special visitor, who turned out to be a huge guy dressed up in a red suit hiding behind hair that was clearly fake, yelling ho-ho-ho like a senseless drunk, and trying to give us candy like the child molesters our parents warned us about.
This was clearly not the Santy Claus of story and song, and I ran screaming out of the room and hid in the bathroom until the school secretary found me, took me to the office, and called my mother to come and get me for upsetting the other children.
I made up my mind right then that all children should be warned that there IS NO SANTY CLAUS, only thousands of weirdos whose idea of fun is to hide behind ratty wigs and fake beards and terrorize small children at Christmas time.
The idea that any child could be dragged to a department store during the Season of Christmas Presents by their own loving parents and forced not only to look upon these nut jobs but to pose for pictures while SITTING ON THEIR LAPS struck me as the stuff of horror movies.
I did my brother a damn favor.
You mean Santa’s not a Christian? Or he is?
“Santa” is an anagram for “Satan.” (I learned this from Raber’s Amish relatives.)
I renounce Santa and all his works.
More than renounce it would seem; also denounce.
Will we ever have an Amish president? Will she/he allow the national Christmas tree, the Easter egg roll, the voluntary turkey?
No, we will never have an Amish president. They don’t participate in the political process beyond paying taxes to stay out of jail. Their notions of holiness depend on remaining separate from the secular world and from us “English.”
Certainly, there would never be an Amish woman president. Women are deeply respected for their work. (One of Raber’s male cousins carefully examined, inside and out, some slippers I had knitted for my father-in-law and told him it was very fine work. The only men I know who could assess the quality of a hand-made garment and understand the work and skill involved are Amish.)
Women are they are equal partners in marriage, especially when it comes to child-rearing, and their opinions in that sphere respected. But gender roles are clearly demarcated, and they are not allowed to serve as “bishops” (more properly elders) in the church.
They do celebrate Christmas, but they find the English hooplah obscene and feel that Santy Claus has replaced Jesus. (Geez, they’re not far wrong, are they?)
They think Christmas trees are pretty. They’d probably find the egg roll innocent fun for children as long as it didn’t involve real eggs and therefore a waste of food. You raise chickens, you have more respect for the value of an egg. (Fr. Komonchak may be able to empathize with that notion.)
Jean, in all my years of parenting various and sundry offspring, not a single, solitary time did we ever successfully coax even one of them to perch on Santa’s lap in the mall. Smart kids.
My kids also never understood why our family bought Christmas gifts for poor families at Christmas time; if Santa is all-beneficent, why would he pass over the very kids who have the least? I think my children concluded at an early age that Santa was regressive about social justice.
Gerelyn @ 12:46 – would you consult a similar site for information about Catholics?
Not sure what you mean by “similar site”. Do you know of a Catholic forum that gets over 1000 posts a day?
There are many who disparage/despise/denounce former Mormons (and former members of the church of Christ) who post on the boards. I don’t share their disgust. I feel that a person who leaves a religion or is thinking of leaving has a right to discuss her/his decision, experiences, etc., with others in the same barque.
I realize there’s a lot of prejudice against anyone from any religion who dares to talk about the abuse s/he may have suffered. The thread about “Silence” is an example of that.
I’ve learned a lot from both sites. (I got interested in them while following two killings: Lori Soares by Mark Hacking in Salt Lake City, and Matthew Winkler by Mary Winkler in Selmer, Tennessee.)
http://www.exmormon.org/
http://ex-churchofchrist.com/
@David and Gerelyn,
I think an additional reason sites like exmormon are useful is that the LDS is so secretive, non-Mormons often have no choice but to get info from those who left. We don’t need exCatholics to tell us what a Confirmation ceremony is like, because anyone can attend; but Temple ceremonies are highly secretive–not even all Mormons know, if they haven’t secured a “Temple recommend.” Many exLDS members find it very difficult even after they’ve left to share the official secrets. If it weren’t for them, lots of Mormon beliefs/practices would’ve stayed under the radar (special under-clothing, the Garden of Eden in Missouri, a secret planet, the Mother in Heaven).
George D: I agree. Sarkozy is upsetting a delicate equilibrium that had prevented religious conflicts for a long time after the 1905 law of separation of church and state. He doesn’t do it in a principled but in an opportunistic way so as to gather votes, sometimes by siding with practising Catholics, and sometimes by attacking Moslems.
Mary, I agree.
(Having grown up in Jackson County, Missouri, aka the Garden of Eden, I’ve always been curious about the Mormons.)
When a new temple was about to open near where I live now, non-Mormons were invited to see it before the consecration. My husband and I took the tour. Fascinating. We had to put on cloth booties to protect the white carpet. The millwork, furniture, pictures of the trek to Utah, etc., were amazing. We enjoyed the irreverent attitudes of the young men in front of us and behind us in line, missionary types. The humor on the ex-Mormon message board is appealing, also.
(The musical Book of Mormon is getting great reviews.)
Anybody worrying about the impending imposition of sharia law in Our Christian Nation may want to hurry on up to Michigan today.
Terry Jones, the Quran-burning fundie preacher and latest darling of the Militant Ignorance movement, is trying to shake a requirement that he be bonded before holding an anti-Islam rally outside the Islamic Center down in Dearborn scheduled for 5 p.m.
Jones refused to pay the bond, and the judge ordered a trial to determine the bonding order. A jury has been selected, but Jones may go ahead with the rally anyway; it’s slated for 5 p.m.
Jones noted that the day of Christ’s death was a good day to go to jail (apparently in the cause of upholding Christianity by insulting those in other faiths).
Dearborn has the largest concentration of Muslims in Michigan. Some interesting responses by Muslim residents there, including an attorney who burned Jones in effigy, but supports his right to protest, if only not to make him a sympathetic victim.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/os-terry-jones-mosque-protest-201104220110421,0,6062421.story
This just in: “Quran-Burning Pastor’s Gun Accidentally Goes Off In Michigan”; the judge should put him on a Greyhound bus back to Fla.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/quran-burning_pastors_gun_accidentally_goes_off_in.php?ref=fpb
Jones is apparently still in court trying to get a stay on the bond requirement. From the DFP about 20 minutes ago.
http://www.freep.com/article/20110422/NEWS02/110422027/Muslims-vow-confront-Terry-Jones-rally-peace?odyssey=nav%7Chead
I truly hope the report accurately reflects the response Dearborn Muslims will give Jones, especially since all is not sunlight and hugs between Muslims and non-Muslims in Dearborn. Not only would ignoring Jones take the wind out of his sails, it would also be a model for other Muslims in parts of the world who are more easily agitated.
Big mistake not to let Jones rally freely, IMO. It implies that the Muslims can’t be trusted to control themselves. It also means that if the court upholds the bond and Jones goes ahead with the rally, he’ll be arrested and look like a victim.
Jones rally strikes me as very sad, particularly given that today’s intentions included prayers for religious peace. What kind of Christian goes out on this holy day with the express intention of pissing people off?
What Happend? Jean? It’s 6:41 EDT; Dearborn’s time as well?
Jean, I’m sure you’re in prayer. So I went to look under “Dearborn, Michigan News.” (Wonder what the tea party would say about the citizens of Dearborn paying to protect Terry Jones?)
Here’s what I found on the web:
The Detroit News/Pool
By Bernie Woodall
DEARBORN, Michigan (Reuters) – …A controversial Florida pastor was jailed on Friday after a Michigan court determined that his planned demonstration outside a mosque was likely to provoke violence and he refused to pay a $1 bond.
Terry Jones, 59, was sent to the county jail in Detroit after he declined to meet the terms of a ruling by District Judge Mark Somers in an apparent protest.
Somers had ordered Jones and a supporter, Wayne Sapp, to each pay $1 under the terms of an order that would have also barred them from the Islamic Center of America mosque and nearby public property for three years.
A six-person jury heard over five hours of testimony and argument before concluding that the planned protest by Jones was “likely to breech the peace.”
The case pitted questions of free speech against concerns about violence in Dearborn, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit with one of the largest Muslim American populations in the United States….
Jones, who represented himself and wore a faded leather jacket and jeans, sat stone-faced and said little after the jury read out its verdict.
When Somers asked if he was prepared to meet the terms of the $1 bond, Jones said, “No.”
Prosecutors, who had sought a $25,000 bond for both Sapp and Jones, said they could be jailed for up to three years if they declined to pay the $1 bond in protest…..”
Dearborn police had denied Jones’s request and asked him to protest instead in a “free speech zone” in front of one of the city buildings.
But Jones, who represented himself in court on Friday, argued that violated his free speech rights….
The American Civil Liberties Union agreed, saying police had overstepped by trying to force Jones to post a “peace bond” that could hold him financially responsible for police protection.
The civil rights group filed a motion asking District Judge Mark Somers to dismiss the case.
Somers, who had ruled in favor of prosecutors before the trial, declined to do so….
Police had estimated that it would cost over $46,000 — including the cost of a helicopter and a dump truck — to keep violence from breaking out if Jones were allowed to protest…..”
Detroit News reports this morning that Jones paid their dollar bonds after about an hour and left jail. Don’t know where they are now, but hope Jones has fixed the safety lock on his pistol.
I don’t know how a reasonable person can conclude that the U.S. is in danger of being taken over by sharia law, but I think Jones ought to have been allowed to go ahead with his protest. Religious leaders had arranged for a separate counter protest ad the Civic Center, and Muslim leaders and members of the community were responding pretty mildly to the whole thing.
I expect Jones will be able to make a whole bunch of hay off this by saying that the courts are more interested in protecting the rights of Muslims than in protecting his free speech rights as an American. (Never mind that many of the Muslims in Dearborn have been Americans for two or three generations.)
One Muslim remarked that Jones had done the city a favor in bringing people together; Jews and Christians signed a “peace scroll” Friday at the Islamic Center and attended services with Muslim neighbors. Relations between Muslims and other Dearborn residents has sometimes been frosty.
Dearborn was an all-white enclave, run for more than 30 years by segregationist Orville Hubbard, so it became a haven for white-flighters in the 1960s.
I once looked into the question of Dearborn’s population (for reasons I can’t remember) and I was struck by the overlay of Muslim and Arab and Christian and Arab, i.e., it was not easy to sort out the Muslim numbers because the Arab number then available included Christians. Any clarity on that?
Not really; there are a lot of Lebanese in Detroit, and Lansing (nearer to where I live), and these were the first wave of Middle Eastern immigrants, largely Melkites. (I recommend to you Woody’s Oasis in East Lansing.) Iranians began coming here in larger numbers in the 1970s and 1980s. Most are professional people. When Dad was going downhill, he was finally referred to an Iranian pulmonologist who figured out how to make him feel better and, I’m convinced, added five years to his life.
I worked with several Lebanese Muslim women whom I thought were Melkites (until I wished them Happy Easter). They were extremely competent, great sense of humor, pillars of moral rectitude, Westernized in dress.
My notions of Islam are highly colored by these interactions. I find it very difficult to view Islam as a threat to anybody, though it’s clear that Islamic fundamentalists (and Christian equivalents) have some pretty dangerous apocalyptic notions.