May 15, 2008
Obama as Muslim Apostate? Rubbish, Says Juan Cole
Juan Cole, at Informed Comment, holds his nose in discussing Edward N. Luttwak’s May 12 New York Times column on how Obama might be perceived as a Muslim apostate.
Luttwak, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues against the notion “that an Obama presidency would be welcomed by the Muslim world.”
Says Luttwak:
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.Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.
His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).
Aside from the larger politics of the matter, Luttwak suggests that it would pose special risks to Obama’s personal safety.
Nonsense, says Cole. “It is just so discouraging that such an ignorant and illogical comment was made by a prominent American pundit,” he writes, “and that The New York Times leant its pages to this complete drivel.”
“Of course, this column is a stealth way of bringing back up the myth of Obama being a Muslim, and it is profoundly dishonest,” Cole says.
He disputes Luttwak’s Koranic interpretation, and his historical and political reasoning.
The bottom line, though, according to Cole, is that “Barack Obama never accepted or practiced Islam as an adult (which would be age 15 in Islamic law) and therefore according to classical Islamic jurisprudence cannot be an apostate.”
Regarding security, Cole says:
An American president might be in danger in the Middle East. But it would be because of the hatred for the United States provoked by the brutal military tactics of the Bush administration and by its blithe unconcern for the welfare of Palestinians and other local people.Alex Kafka | Posted on Thursday May 15, 2008 | PermalinkIt would be because Bush is the apostate, since he was born under the U.S. constitution but he left it for a faith in torture, killing innocents, neocolonialism, and mass murder (as at Fallujah).
That’s the apostasy that Middle Easterners most mind.
Comments
Previous: Intervention in Myanmar?
Next: Why Solitaire (Might) Make Professors Better
According to Sharia law and the Quran, isn’t Senator Obama in serious trouble with Islamic authorities since they have to consider him an apostate.
— Marty May 15, 11:21 AM #
Interestingly, the only Palestinians who enjoy the beneifts of democracy and the rule of law as well as a middle class economy are citizens of Israel.
— Marty May 15, 11:56 AM #
Obama is equally an assassin’s target from racially bigoted white so-called Christians in the U.S., as from U.S. hating jihadist Muslims
— BG May 15, 03:21 PM #
Marty, wake up! Did you not read the column? Are you like so many students who comment on something the did not read? Obama is not an apostate according to Islamic law.
— DT May 15, 03:25 PM #
Luttwak is Jewish. Need I say more?
— Gera Rosy May 15, 03:36 PM #
Edward Luttwak——Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq.
— Gera Rosy May 15, 03:46 PM #
You didn’t need to say more…
— Perplexed May 15, 04:00 PM #
Luttwak does have it wrong. Cole has it right. But why is it necessary to drag in Luttwak’s ethnicity into the debate?
Moreover, Luttwak was correct that Obama, despite some reports to the contrary, WAS born a Muslim. And while Juan Cole is correct that in “classical Islamic jurisprudence” Obama is not an apostate, some of the jihadists DO NOT practice “classical jurisprudence.” That’s part of the current problem. The overwhelming majority of Muslims do not believe that you have to stone adulterers to death, but in some places adulterers do still get stoned.
— Old Hand May 15, 04:12 PM #
FROM WIKIPEDIA: [Though not a Bahai presently] Cole’s perspective is also informed by his Bahá‘í background which favors internationalism, ethnic diversity, and modernism — values which he traces to various 19th-century Middle Eastern historical developments (the subject of his Modernity and the Millennium.) One important consequence is that he tends to value multinational (and especially UN) initiatives over unilateral military ones.32 Another is that he favors multi-ethnic states over separatist movements. A third is that he views Islam (along with other religions) as essentially good, but distorted by certain of its political appropriators (and critics).33 Cole’s resignation from his religion freed him from Bahá‘í strictures against political involvement, and his blog often offers center-left political opinion.
— Emmett May 15, 04:16 PM #
Yes, sure Juan Cole has it “right”. Everybody knows who Cole is and thankfully I don’t need to say more…
— I.C. May 15, 04:27 PM #
Who cares?? The answer should be: NO ONE. Let the man be whatever he wants to be and each observer can sort it out for him/herself.
— Al May 15, 04:53 PM #
Cole is right about Obama, as I understand things, though Old Hand is surely right that “some of the jihadists do not practice ‘classical jurisprudence.’” But I do wish Cole had been as careful about the charge of apostacy against Bush as he was about Obama. Clearly, while he is many things, Bush is in no usual sense of the word an apostate. Being born under the U.S. Constitution is not as such to have been born into a religion. And “faith” in torture, etc., is not faith as the Christian and Muslim theologians I read understand it.
— Richard Hennessey May 15, 05:25 PM #
How does Cole account for Obama proudly using his middle name as late as last fall as the badge of his pride. Hussien is a name he has proudly proclajmed until lately. So why has he changed now? His father was always a Muslim. He married in Africa and had c hildren and then came to the usa and married Obama’s mother and had a child. Then he goes back to Africa and has another child by his first wife. Then off to Europe where he has another wife and another child. According to Obama he is and has always been proud of his father? Has anyone of you ever read his book? His father was always Muslim and Obama has always been proud of that. Ask his classmates at Harvard.
Now that Joe Biden and others have buried Clinton we will now learn the truth.
— frank donley May 15, 07:15 PM #
When one runs for president of the U.S., everything is relevant. Perhaps especially so when one has connections, however tenuous, to a religion that has sworn to defeat democracy, and, in Obama’s case, been an active member of a church whose leader openly espouses hatred for the U.S.
— Sven Carlsen May 16, 09:38 AM #
Prominent American pundits—since when was that a category worthy of any sort of respect at all. Prominent American pile of dog doo. Prominence is a positive label only in a world of mass greed-filled media where prominent people help make each other’s prominence more prominent—for a final purpose, I believe, we call—sales.
— Richard Tabor Greene May 16, 10:08 AM #
Democratic people have a history of being fooled. LIke the pied Piper Obama is not what he appears and unfortunately the main stream press such as msnbc and Chris and Mike are licking Obama’s boots for some reason. But please do not think of them or Keith as news reporters as they are only demogogs spreading false stories to futher the new Messiah.
— Frank Mitchell May 16, 11:25 AM #
Obama’s mother had to convert to Islam to marry an Indonesian.
For all we know he may have decided to leave Islam after 15 years. Mr. Cult of Personality has not been clear on the issue.
— eh May 16, 03:21 PM #
#13—I’ve read his books—he wasn’t raised a Muslim, his father , who he only saw once after the age of two was an atheist. #17—They were married in the states. Why would his mother have had to convert? Where is this written in Indonesian law? Additionally, there are numerous interfaith couples, including Muslims and those of other faiths. Its sheer lunacy to keep perpetuating these absurd stories. If you don’t want to vote for Obama, base it on his policies, not lies.
— MrsJones May 16, 11:21 PM #
Obama’s father was Muslim & so was his step-father… It wouldn’t surprise me if his mother had converted, in at least one of the marriages.
— Martin May 18, 10:20 PM #
Well, classical Islamic jurisprudence may not ate considered him to be an adult until age 15 and therefore not responsible for his actions, but internet service provider in the small ME country in which I live blocks access to sites on Mr. Obama because they do consider him an apostate…
— Ian May 20, 01:58 AM #