Barack Obama is not a Muslim (well, it depends who you ask)
A Pew research poll yesterday found that only 34% of Americans can correctly identify President Obama as a Christian. This number is down 17 percentage points from those who identified his Christian faith correctly during the 2008 campaign (apparently folks are forgetful about their leader’s faith?). 24% of Americans incorrectly believe Obama is Muslim. (And the Pew poll was conducted before Obama weighed in on the Park51/Cordoba House project question. Here is a similar TIME poll.)
Before I go further, let me follow Amy Sullivan’s lead (here) and note what must be said at this point. Sullivan writes:
Let me pause for a moment here to say that it is of course not a smear to call someone a Muslim. It is, however, obnoxious to say someone is a member of a religious faith when he’s not–and to insist that he is not a member of the tradition he does claim. It would also be foolish and naive to pretend that conservatives who call Obama a Muslim are doing it in a neutral way and that their intention is not to raise questions about his “otherness.”
By the way, for those who actually want to think deeply on Obama’s faith, pick up a copy of The Faith of Barack Obama by Stephen Mansfield. But here’s what this outrageous poll data causes me to ponder:
First, I’m struck by the fact that though I interact with hundreds of people personally and professionally, I’d be hard-pressed to name more than a handful who might believe President Obama is Muslim. But, according to the poll, 1 in 4 Americans believe so. This reminds me of my sheltered nature, of the cliquishness of American life, and my self-selected friends and relations. Additionally, since Obama’s faith practically never comes up in regular conversation, I wonder if perhaps I’m just way off presuming my friends and relations have accurate understandings of Obama’s faith.
Second, who knows how really to delve into such things via a poll, but I wonder how much the faith poll numbers would correspond to more overt racism if pollsters asked the right question. My guess is that many of those who believe Obama is Muslim might also be very uncomfortable with those of other faiths and those of other skin colors in general. (For example, the TIME poll finds, “Nearly one-third of the country thinks adherents of Islam should be barred from running for President.”) Perhaps it’s the case that maligning Islam is somehow culturally okay, while overtly using racial epithets crosses a time-honored line.
Finally, I profoundly disagree with Sullivan’s statement in her analysis that, “In a perfect world, nobody would give a hoot whether the president went to church or said grace before meals or ever uttered one word publicly about his religious beliefs.” Religious belief is hugely important to me, as is any moral underpinnings or claims about the end times, or belief in divine interventionism, or God’s loving nature, or God’s non-existence, etc.. I will happily vote for candidates of many religious faiths (or none), but I will always seek to do so considering a candidate’s faith, thoughtfulness, and positions on the issues. I appreciate Sullivan’s reporting, but I’ll go to my grave professing that faith matters matter. And that’s what’s awesome about the US and the First Amendment — and very scary about this poll data.
Update: Amy Sullivan reflects a bit more on 8/20/10 in “Are One-Quarter of Americans Freakin’ Morons”
Creative Commons image by Alex Johnson
Connect Online
I too am re-reminded (re-reminded?) of the ways by which birds of a feather flock. It scares me, because the people who still think President Obama is a Muslim flock together. But even worse, is that I do the same thing with everything too. My view of Scripture, theology, evangelism, political leanings, etc.
I just had a lengthy discussion on facebook with a high school buddy of mine. He actually asked me “are their still people who think Pres. Obama is NOT a Muslim?” I was dumbfounded. But he was dumbfounded too. I was dumbfounded that he was dumbfounded. You get the jist.
I think it has much to do with the way we deceive ourselves–by colluding with those who reinforce our own opinions; that way we don’t have to experience the cognitive dissonance involved with *listening* to another’s opinion.
Thanks for the thoughtful reflection Adam. I, too, must be in a bubble. I don’t know [of] anyone who believes Obama is Muslim.
I disagree slightly, though, on how important our President’s religious beliefs are. Perhaps it’s due to our (mine vs. yours) differing faith traditions (Lutheran vs. Presbyterian) and the Lutheran distinction between the 2 kingdoms, but I tend to believe that our leaders’ religious beliefs are less important than how he/she leads.
While my beliefs about governance stem from deeply held religious beliefs, I vote based upon my knowledge of a candidate’s beliefs about governance, regardless of the source of those beliefs. If I believe a Jewish candidate will best represent me (or my community/nation/world), I will vote for that person. If I believe a Muslim, or an Atheist, or a Zoroastrian will be the best leader in my context, I will vote for that person.
It’s the issues that matter to me in politics, not the source of the belief.
Thanks for the conversation…
Dan
Thanks for the comments, friends. (and the Twitter shout-outs)
@Dan re government officials and religious beliefs, I do think you’re right in pointing out a difference in the Lutheran and Presbyterian approach. Without getting into the specifics of Calvin and Luther, I’ll just briefly mention H. Richard Neibuhr’s five “Christ and Culture” typologies. Neibuhr characterizes Lutherans as espousing an approach to Christ and culture in paradox, while Calvinists he characterizes as following a “Christ transforming culture” model. Yes it’s too simplistic, but I view faith as ideally a transformative thing, something that affects every aspect of one’s life. So I then do really care about what politicians believe, because I see beliefs (or even world views) as integral to all actions.
For me the life of faith is about about integrating one’s beliefs into one’s actions, not keeping them separate. I think we’re not on totally separate pages here, but probably are approaching them different. But I do wonder if I’m pushing my Calvinist ways on other faith traditions, and if that’s fair or not. Hmm.
I have a feeling our disagreement has more to do with approach than it does with outcome. I guess the argument I’m trying to make is that I’m more concerned with a political candidate’s view of “how the world should be” and his/her ideas on how to get there, rather than the theological underpinnings behind those views. That being said, I agree that I cannot separate my theological view from my view of “how the world should be.”
But, the label of “Christian” or “Muslim” is not necessarily that helpful to understand the particulars of a candidate’s political views. There are many Christian politicians/leaders who I passionately disagree with regarding the role of government, taxes, military, etc.
I’m no more likely to vote for them because they’re Christian than I would NOT vote for a candidate because he/she is Muslim.
I wonder to what effect it matters that in 2008 Barak’s Christian faith was a negative issue from conservatives because of Jeremiah Wright. Now that there is now feasible way (though thats probably naive of me) to use Wright against him… its good to forget that and go (back) to the whole… Barak’s a muslim line.
And I too choose to believe lots of things with regards to those I associate with daily (and even weekly)… like whether they would stay in our church if certain PC(USA) ammendments pass… politics… and well – life the universe and everything! Sometimes I think such willful naivety is necessary to maintain my passion for educational ministry and reflective Christian discipleship.
I took Statistics 101 in college, and I always think of that class whenever I read anything to do with polls. Big polling organizations like Pew Research and Time try to keep the margin of error as low as possible, so I know better than to say “Well, they’re just asking the wrong people.”
But I do know to say:
- *How was this poll conducted?* By phone, by web, by call-in radio show, by retweets on Twitter – how? Who are we missing out on by conducting the poll this way? For example: if the poll is done by randomly selecting land-line phones, I’m out of the game, as I have only a cell phone. Etc.
- *When was this poll conducted?* (See “Poll conducted before Cordoba House project.”)
- *How was the question phrased?* There’s a big difference between “Multiple choice: What religion is our President?”, “Fill in the blank: What religion is our President?” and “Is our President a Muslim?” And when you start filling in “Barack Obama” for “our President” – or “Barack Hussein Obama” – well, you can see how it goes.
- *What other questions were on the poll?* If the TIME poll starts by saying, “How do you feel about Muslims in America today?”, then “Do you think a Muslim should be allowed to serve as President?”, and then “Is President Obama a Muslim?”, it is almost a sure thing that more people will say Yes to the last question than if it was asked without the previous ones. (This is called the anchoring effect – a recent blog on it here: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/07/27/anchoring-effect/.)
- And on and on. This is why a liberal arts degree can ruin a brain: you learn just enough to know that you know very little.
Thanks for the reminder to keep all polls in perspective, Emmy. That said, I’m inclined to give credence to Pew and TIME, both organizations with lots of money and reputations to uphold. Maybe this is my naivete. Maybe I’m cutting corners on my own research. (And maybe, I can look into some of your questions later
)
Re the cell phone thing, I did get a call on my cell a few weeks back for a poll — it’s allowable, if they pay you. I got $5 in the mail a few weeks later. So I do think the pollsters factor this into their margin of errors, etc.
Thanks again. Always good to keep questioning.
I just wanted to get the bonus brownie points for answering you on the blog and not Facebook. Truth is relative.
Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich repeatedly warns that President Obama’s “secular, socialist machine” is threatening to destroy America by undermining the Judeo-Christian “values” upon which the country was built.
This is the same Newt who said, “It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.“
I love this…It doesn’t matter what I do, people need to hear what I have to say. No body else can say what I can say….. Actually this is a valid arguement, but not true. I am not sure that people need to hear what he has to say. I can’t help but believe the people who think Obama is a Muslim are the same people who believe whatever Newt says regardless of what he does.
How can you compete against this ignorance?
I’ve also read that the figure is 18 percent, not 24. He does have Muslim roots. But the thing I wonder is how many in the Muslim world consider PBO a Muslim, in spite of his public profession of Christianity. I heard a Muslim scholar once say he believes Jesus was just “a good Muslim.”
Good stuff, Adam. Loved Emmy’s perspective as someone who’s studied this.
Not completely related, but I also blogged today about statistics in terms of a different issue (related to Islam as well, actually!)
http://theblueroomblog.org/2010/08/20/how-statistic/