Liberal and Muslim

Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, presents to his co-religionists in the U.S. important political and moral realities.

Rafia ZAKARIA

US: As the Democratic Party took control of the United States House of Representatives on January 4, history was made on several fronts. Not only is this the first time that the U.S. House of Representatives is being led by a female Speaker, but it is also the first time that a Muslim has been elected to Congress.

Coming at a time when Islamphobia is on the rise (a recent Gallup poll cited that 39 per cent of Americans were in favour of requiring Muslims to carry special identity cards), the election of Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota's Fifth District, is for many American Muslims the welcome respite from unwarranted scrutiny and baseless suspicion that they have been hoping for since the disastrous events of 9/11.

In a country barely recovering from the domination of Christian conservatives in both the House and the Senate, the election of Ellison has not been without controversy.

At the forefront of the hullabaloo has been the Congressman's request to be sworn in on a Koran rather than the customary Bible offered to members during their private oath-taking ceremonies.

While Article VI of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the use of any religious test as a qualification for public office and no religious texts are used in the formal swearing-in ceremony in the House, Ellison's request put his Muslim faith at the centre of a heated political debate.

Especially irked were the stalwarts of the religious Right, who, already peeved at watching the Democrats take control of the House, jumped on the issue.

One of them, Republican Congressman Virgil Goode from Virginia, penned a nasty letter stating that without immigration reform "there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran".

Dennis Prager, a conservative radio talk show host, even went so far as to say that Ellison should not be allowed to serve in Congress if he refused to take the oath on the Bible since that was the traditional text used in such ceremonies.

However, in the end, the constitutional provisions that specifically prevent such forms of religious discrimination in any form of public service won out.

In a worthy retort to the misguided appeals to tradition bandied about by Christian conservatives such as Goode, Ellison was sworn in on a Koran owned by none other than the American founding father Thomas Jefferson.

The history around this rare edition of the Koran, which was walked over from the Library of Congress across the street specifically for the 10-minute ceremony, made Ellison's election a testament to the long-standing American tradition of religious diversity.

This simple fact, as affirmed by many commentators in newspapers across the U.S., went further in establishing the diversity of American religious experience than many a concocted public relations effort.

As stated by Ellison's own mother, herself a practising Catholic, the controversy over her son's election was good because "many people are going to learn what the diversity of America is all about".

The aftermath of Ellison's oath-taking ceremony was an equally hopeful indication that Ellison's election and swearing in on the Koran may have opened a new chapter in reconfiguring the understanding of Islam within the American populace.

Most notably, Ellison himself presents a picture of Islamd as religion deeply rooted in the American heartland rather than as simply an import brought to the land through the hands of immigrants from South Asia and West Asia.

Ellison was born in Detroit, Michigan and can trace his family history back to the mid-1700s. His grandfather was a notable civil rights activist in the Deep South.

Raised as a Roman Catholic, Ellison converted to Islam at the age of 19 while in college at Wayne State University in Detroit, from where he went on to law school at the University of Minnesota.

In the years leading up to his campaign for Congress, Ellison had a long-standing record of public service, serving in the Minnesota legislature and championing causes that improved the plight of the urban poor.

Ideologically, Ellison cites "family faith and a need to work for social justice and the common good" as his guiding principles. In a recent column in The Washington Post, he decried the aspect of religious faith that promotes exclusivity.

Citing an example of a typical religious service, he touted the beauty of faith that preaches love and condemned the aspect that teaches that "God loves you but only you and people like you".

This exclusive aspect of faith, borne out of the myth of scarcity that elevates some above others, is in Ellison's view what prevents mankind from uniting against the scourges of poverty and injustice.

Soon after Ellison was sworn into Congress, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), America's largest umbrella Muslim organisation, issued a statement entitled "ISNA salutes Keith Ellison".

Both the timing and the content of the statement bear clues regarding some hesitance on the part of the American Muslim community to claim Ellison as a worthy poster boy.

Muslim organisations such as the ISNA and the Council on American-Islamic Relations are notably absent from the Congressman's website, which lists endorsements from other organisations such as American Jewish World and the Arab American Leadership.

It is thus also interesting to note that the ISNA's statement of support did not emerge until the controversy regarding Ellison's use of the Koran landed at the forefront of media coverage of the newly elected Democratic Congress.

It could be speculated, thus, that Ellison was "claimed" by Muslim organisations not during his campaign but only when his Muslim identity came to the forefront during the controversy over the oath-taking ceremony.

Perhaps understandable in terms of claiming an increasingly rare pro-Muslim media moment, the timing surrounding the issue bears clues regarding the discomfort of some Muslim organisations on Ellison's decidedly liberal politics.

The content of the statement issued by the ISNA further substantiates the moral and political reckoning imposed on American Muslims by Ellison's election.

While mentioning Ellison's support for vagrancy laws, homelessness outreach and increasing the minimum wage, the statement omits any mention of Ellison's consistent support of abortion rights and his long-standing efforts to prevent the passage of Bills banning gay marriage in Minnesota.

It also omits mention of the fact that Ellison considers "Hamas to be the greatest impediment to peace in the Middle East (West Asia)".

Put together , the timing and content of the ISNA's statement portent the initiation of much needed debate in the American Muslim Community regarding the compatibility of progressive liberal values espoused by the pro-minority Democratic Party and Islamic teachings.

The origins of the debate are based in the ideological positions of the two parties that dominate American politics. Historically, many American Muslims, being moral conservatives, have been supporters of the Republican Party.

Sharing many of the value-based politicking of Christian religious conservatives, such as the establishment of faith-based symbols in public places, the banning of gay marriage and abortion, many Muslims have found the Republican political platform politically and morally appealing.

In addition, the economic demographics of the American Muslim community, the fact that they are among the wealthiest minorities in the U.S. has further drawn them to traditional Republican position on low taxation and fiscal incentives for the wealthy.

Indeed, during the 2000 elections most American Muslims supported the election of George W. Bush. September 11, 2001, changed this relationship of convenience and affinity.

With the evolution of the neoconservative agenda for war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the passage of laws such as the U.S.A. Patriot Act, American Muslims got increasingly distanced from the Republican Party.

The increased profiling of American Muslims and the surveillance and scrutiny of Muslim American organisations further widened this political gap.

In this year's Congressional election, American Muslims, whetted by foot-age to thousands of Muslims dying in Iraq, of American Muslims being discriminated against when praying at airports, and of mass detention of South Asian and West Asian Muslims on immigration charges, were heavily inclined to vote Democrat.

However, while the Democratic Party does support a withdrawal from Iraq, its positions of social issues such as gay marriage and abortion are often dissimilar from the conservative positions of many American Muslims.

Rafa Zakaria is an attorney currently completing her Ph.d at Indiana University.

Courtesy: Frontline