Daisy Khan
Executive Director of American Society for Muslim Advancement

Daisy Khan

Khan is Executive Director of American Society for Muslim Advancement. Wife of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, Khan mentors young Muslims various modern era challenges.

 ALL POSTS

Palin Must Shift from Parochial Religion to Universal Politics

In many respects, Sarah Palin represents the best of our great country. As mother of five and executive leader, star athlete and beauty pageant champion, secular politician and religious devotee, Palin has successfully molded herself into a complex and multifaceted embodiment of the United States of America, a small-town PTA activist turned populist national reformer living the American dream. Arguably, she mirrors Barack Obama in this sense, a similarly profound - and ostensibly paradoxical - picture of America, its people, promise and hope. While Palin and Obama may share little in common politically, they both personify a momentous shift in this country against an intransigent status quo, as well as the historic de-relegation of women and African-Americans to the fringes of national politics.

In spite of Palin's undeniable appeal to many Americans, it is the convergence of these latter qualities - secular politician and religious devotee - that has left many of us scratching our heads in recent days. To what extent will her own unique religious experiences and convictions - or more to the point, her experiences and convictions within the context of a parochial Evangelical Christian milieu - drive her political policies, which could then determine our country's actions in diverse contexts like the Iraq War or Alaska pipeline? Will Palin's political choices reflect her personal religious beliefs, beliefs the vast majority of Americans do not share? Will she subject her executive decision-making and the country's - and globe's - well-being to these particular faith-based opinions? And most importantly, as a national leader, will she demonstrate the ability to set aside these beliefs in order to represent all Americans - including those who do not share her own faith background - and forge broad coalitions?

Of course, religious adherents are guided by their religion; we seek God's direction in our most important decisions, whether at home, place of worship, or work. As a Muslim woman of faith, I always strive to act according to my understanding of God's purposes for my life, and I would not expect that endeavoring to suddenly change if my career path were to take a different direction. Furthermore, non-religious people must recognize that many of their own strongly-held opinions essentially amount to faith-based beliefs, maintained with an intricate balance of objective fact, personal experience, and subjective faith.

I fully insist that to embrace belief sincerely - whether in religious tradition, secular ideology, or personal conviction - is laudable. Sarah Palin, however, has much to learn. She must restrain controversial faith-driven policies and religious assertions as she strives to become a national public servant, representing over three hundred million Americans and leading the most powerful nation in the world. Perhaps the relatively monolithic constituency in Alaska resonated with her claims to a divine mandate on the Alaskan pipeline or the Iraq War. I - and tens of millions of Americans like me - do not. We wonder, does her support for hotly-debated policies in these areas stem from a reliance on statistics, expert projections, specialists' knowledge, or even her own awareness of the specific factors that inform these debates? Or alternatively, does she take on faith that building a gas pipeline is "God's will," or that the Iraq War constitutes a "task from God?" What exclusive access to God's Divine plan does Palin enjoy that the rest of us do not? Regardless of one's opinion on Iraq, this war has cost Americans over four thousand of our sons and daughters, not to mention more than two hundred thousand Iraqis. To connect this violence to God's purposes strikes me as the epitome of presumption and arrogance.

I must admit that I cannot provide a simple solution to this conundrum of religion and politics, and we should all welcome an open, robust national dialogue on the subject. Nevertheless, I worry that Palin's conjoining of her particular religious faith convictions with universal policy-making could generate potentially disastrous consequences for our country and world. We have already witnessed similar effects for the past eight years.

By Daisy Khan  |  September 10, 2008; 3:48 PM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: What's Good for GM Is Good for God | Next: Sarah Palin: Prophet or Politician?

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Daisy,

We realize you cannot purchase or read Sir Salman Rushdie's book, Satanic Verses, since Islamic death squads would be knocking on your door. To give you a flavor of said book:

an excerpt from p. 376, paperback edition:

The faithful lived by lawlessness, but in those years Mahound - or should one say the Archangel Gibreel? - should one say Al-Lah? - became obsessed by law.

Amid the palm-trees of the oasis Gibreel appeared to the Prophet and found himself spouting rules, rules, rules, until the faithful could scarcely bear the prospect of any more revelation, Salman
said, rules about every damn thing, if a man farts let him turn his face to the wind, a rule
about which hand to use for the purpose of cleaning one's behind.

It was as if no aspect of human existence was to be left unregulated, free. The revelation - the recitation- told the faithful how much to eat, how deeply they should sleep, and which sexual
positions had received divine sanction, so that they leamed that sodomy and the missionary position were approved of by the archangel, whereas the forbidden postures included all those in which the female was on top.

Gibreel further listed the permitted and forbidden subjects of conversation, and earmarked the parts of the body which could not be scratched no matter how unbearably they might itch. He vetoed the consumption of prawns, those bizarre other-worldly creatures which no member of the faithful had ever seen, and required animals to be killed slowly, by bleeding, so that by experiencing their deaths to the full they
might arrive at an understanding of the meaning of their lives, for it is only at the moment of death that living creatures understand
that life has been real, and not a sort of dream.

And Gibreel the archangel specified the manner in which a man should be buried, and how his property should be divided, so that
Salman the Persian got to wondering what manner of God this was that sounded so much like a businessman.

This was when he had the idea that
destroyed his faith, because he recalled that of course Mahound himself had been a businessman, and a damned successful one at that, a person to whom organization and rules came naturally, so
how excessively convenient it was that he should have come up with such a very businesslike archangel, who handed down the management decisions of this highly corporate, if noncorporeal, God."

Comments from all the peace-loving, tolerant Muslims out there???

Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | September 14, 2008 5:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Excellent comments, Ms. Khan. You speak for me, a religious man who also struggles with the role religion (including my religion) should play in national politics. We'll see how this all shakes out in the coming months!

Posted by: Jeff Vandenbosch | September 12, 2008 3:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"Daisy, Daisy, Daisy,"
---------

Give me your answer, do?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 12, 2008 1:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Gibson is a joke, a morning talk show host and a silly womanly program to boot. Put her in front of Ted Koppel, a real journalist. The Gibber is now a journalist.

But something of greater concern to all Americans is the Nazi like tactics of the Evangelical party, the party of the anti-christ.

VOTING MANIPULATION

State Republicans in Macomb Co, Michigan, though, have a plan to give the McCain campaign an edge: suppress the vote.

The chairman of the Republican Party in Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the GOP's effort to challenge voters on Election Day. "We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren't voting from those addresses," party chairman James Carabelli told the local paper in a telephone interview earlier this week.

State election rules allow parties to assign "election challengers" to polls to monitor the election. These volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they "have a good reason to believe" that the person is not eligible to vote."

The Michigan Republicans' planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being "true residents."

The scheme would, of course, disproportionately affect African-American families in the area, who are more likely to vote Democratic, and more likely to be in foreclosure as a result of sub-prime loans.

This is just part of a "comprehensive voter-challenge campaign" Michigan Republicans are launching this year, which will coordinate with the regional McCain campaign to train volunteers in challenging those who wish to vote on Election Day.

Asked about the GOP's efforts, Carabelli said, "I would rather not tell you all the things we are doing."

THEY DID THIS TO SOLDIERS SERVING IN IRAQ IN 2004.

Posted by: basementfrog | September 12, 2008 11:22 AM
Report Offensive Comment

By: http:////.......({..J..}).......({..O..}).......({..Z..}).......({...E.}).......({..V..}).......({..Z..})........dot...... US


.
.
.
.
.
.
international Year [of] Astronomy, 2008.

Something the Jealous Catholics & Evangelicals are Jealous About & did Everything They can to Stop "i" from Spreading the "EC{lat-i-on Gospel" so to spaketh!


IYA2008


IYA2008

IYA2008
.
.
.
.
.
By: http:////.......({..J..}).......({..O..}).......({..Z..}).......({...E.}).......({..V..}).......({..Z..})........dot...... US

Posted by: VOTE: Sacred Marriage is between a real Mavotite (Mr) & a Real Sporade (Ms). not Mr & Mr.. | September 11, 2008 10:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Daisy, Daisy, Daisy,

You are supposedly a moderate Muslim but how does that compute with the violence toward women taught in your koran??

Lets first begin with your basic Islamic beliefs to see how moderate you really are:

Do you believe :

1. In "pretty/ugly wingie"/paranormal thingies?

2. That the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words now listed in the koran?

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life?

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7 800 year-old feud between Sunnis and Shiites give significant credence that suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran?

5. That having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of lust and polygamy?

6. That the condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of anger and greed?

7. that Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s book, Infidel, is her autobiography??

excerpts, etc. from the book for your perusal and comments.

"Thus begins the extraordinary story of a woman born into a family of desert nomads, circumcised as a child, educated by radical imams in Kenya and Saudi Arabia, taught to believe that if she uncovered her hair, terrible tragedies would ensue. It's a story that, with a few different twists, really could have led to a wretched life and a lonely death, as her grandmother warned. But instead, Hirsi Ali escaped -- and transformed herself into an internationally renowned spokeswoman for the rights of Muslim women."
ref: Washington Post book review.

four excerpts:

p. 47 paperback issue:

"Some of the Saudi women in our neighborhood were regularly beaten by their husbands. You could hear them at night. Their screams resounded across the courtyards. "No! Please! By Allah!"


p.68:

"The Pakistanis were Muslims but they too had castes. The Untouchable girls, both Indian and Pakistani were darker skin. The others would not play with them because they were untouchable. We thought that was funny because of course they were touchable: we touched them see? but also horrifying to think of yourself as untouchable, despicable to the human race."

p.309

"Between October 2004 and May 2005, eleven Muslim girls were killed by their families in just two regions (there are 20 regions in Holland). After that, people stopped telling me I was exaggerating."

p. 347

"The kind on thinking I saw in Saudi Arabia and among the Brotherhood of Kenya and Somalia, is incompatible with human rights and liberal values. It preserves the feudal mind-set based on tribal concepts of honor and shame. It rests on self-deception, hyprocricy, and double standards. It relies on the technologial advances of the West while pretending to ignore their origin in Western thinking. This mind-set makes the transition to modernity very painful for all who practice Islam".

Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | September 11, 2008 5:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Dear Ms. Kahn,

Please don't believe all the innuendos about Sarah Palin in the MSM and some blogs. To date I have seen no evidence that she injects her personal beliefs into her public servant role(s) in any inappropriate or illegal fashion. I am willing to trust that she will bring both experience (which is considerable, despite the naysayers) and spiritually-guided wisdom to the office of Vice President. While I do not share religious denominational affinity with Governor Palin, I do share many of her values. The key word here is *trust*. I have always trusted Senator McCain, and trust his judgment in selecting her.

Posted by: June Fremont | September 11, 2008 5:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

drfnw,

that's a good point, although i palin's record does indicate an over-willingness to push her own religious beliefs, to the detriment of her constituents.

with regards to khan's article, i think she's pointing to a larger discussion on religion and politics. with bush in office for the past eight years and palin as a potential vp (not to mention obama, who is also a religious man), this is an important - and long overdue - discussion in america. khan seems to me to be on the right track here. leave the specifics of palin's record to the political pundits.

Posted by: Libertarian Larry | September 11, 2008 3:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

It is high time a politician stands up for what this country was founded on. No matter what the secular leftist press tells you, this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. The prohibition from having a state mandated religion was written as a protection, but has been morphed into something totally different, the persecution of religion. If we do not return to the Judeo-Christian principles that the US was founded on we severly risk oblivion. The secular world that defies God will not work. Promoting and living the things that are abominations to God will not last. No society that has gone the way the US is going now has survived. Read your history, it is littered with the ruins of people that mocked God.
Maybe if the population put God first, we would all be better off. If my opinion on the need for God offends you, oh well, you will get over it.

Posted by: Mac Boney | September 11, 2008 3:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am confused that your article is so hypothetical. Does not Governor Palin (or Mayor Palin) have a track record as a leader of governement? Are there examples in her past that would suggest a record of furthering her religious goals in ways that detract from good government?

For example, much of the criticism against her is related to her support of abstinence only sex education. In her work with the public schools through the PTA, has she caused other programs to be discarded in favor of her preferred approach? did she do this as mayor? How about as governor? If so, show us the record. If not, let's admit that she has a track record in elected government of working for all people and allow her deeds to indicate how she would act in still higher office.

Posted by: drfnw | September 11, 2008 2:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Sally,

Of course all beliefs are particular. That's precisely the point Ms. Khan is making. She's not condemning Palin - like much of the secular members of the media might - instead, she's pointing out the complexity of the issue. Of course, she rightly describes the danger in Palin's religious statements on Iraq and the Alaskan pipeline. Do you not agree with this danger?

You criticize Khan for being Muslim, as if simply believing in Islam were subject to critique; however, she consistently articulates a moderate and complex perspective that I for one rarely hear from any faith or non-faith adherents.

Why the animosity towards Muslims? Is this an American value? I think not.

Posted by: Jeff Christenson | September 11, 2008 1:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Her "particular" religion? All beliefs are "particular" including secular ones. And this coming from someone who professes the Muslim faith. Excuse me while I laugh.

Posted by: Sally | September 11, 2008 1:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin has what appears to be an accurate biography of Sarah Palin. There appears to be nothing in the information provided that she ever tried or would try to impose her religious beliefs on anyone."

That's cause the page was posted in its entirety by the GOP when the announcement was made.

Posted by: Paganplace | September 11, 2008 12:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment

God’s will I would think would be to heal everyone. Back in the time Jesus saw that the wealthy were keeping all the protein for themselves and the poor and indentured servitude got only bread, a diet of which leads to severe malnutrition, biochemical malfunction and disease, so he was teaching them how to fish and make nets that they could get needed to eat protein and actually lift themselves from poverty. Therefore his will would be “The End of Disease” which you can read the steps and insight here.

There is no cure for disease, but there is a solution, the end of disease
http://intelegen.com/there_is_no_cure_for_disease.htm

You can also read the Fish Story Here
Sirius The FBI Agent and The Fish Company
http://iamblogging.net/Urgo/archives/2004/10/sirius_the_fbi.html

Obviously the people in positions of power are not doing God’s will because we would be implementing Universal Health not Universal Disease Care.

Posted by: Richard Thomas | September 11, 2008 11:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I have analyzed God's energy system design. Gas pipe lines are not his design.

He suspended a nuclear reactor overhead which distributes energy equally for free, all over the planet, effortless to use.

As I brought to our attention before:

In looking at the energy systems in the human body, and there isn't centralized production of energy, there is decentralized production of energy. Each cell has it's own energy production as should each house on the planet. We do need storage just like the ATP molecule in the body.

It's too bad that some don't have me by their side to duel against the fictions. I have this really cool sword ~Excalibur~.

GM is burdened by disease care costs it runs into the tens of billions. This is not good for America. It is time to implement Universal Health, not Universal Disease Care.

I also know about their internal accounting practices, and hence the need for transparency.

Posted by: Richard Thomas | September 11, 2008 11:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I don't think you've parsed Palin's comment correctly. What Palin said (to a bunch of Christian students, NOT in the context of promoting her policies politically) was to asked for prayer that the humans plans for the war be those of God's intention.

She, like almost all Christians believes that God's hand is in every detail of life.

Posted by: P Duggan | September 11, 2008 10:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Our War on Terror and Aggression:

An update (or how we are spending or how we have spent USA taxpayers’ money to eliminate global terror and aggression)

The terror and aggression via a Partial and Recent Body Count

1) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, US troops, (3,371, combat 778 non-combat) and 86,664 – 94,561 Iraqi civilians, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ and
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf


4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 people were killed and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack killed at least 11 and wounded 85.[2]


5) Bali-in 2002-killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.


6) Bali in 2005- Twenty people were killed, and 129 people were injured by three bombers who killed themselves in the attacks.


7) Spain in 2004- killing 191 people and wounding 2,050.


8) UK in 2005- The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.

Other elements of our War on Terror:


1. Saddam, his sons and major henchmen have been deleted. Saddam's bravado about WMD was one of his major mistakes.

2. Iran is being been contained. (beside containing the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Baghdad, that is the main reason we are in Iraq. And yes, essential oil continues to flow from the region.)

3. Libya has become almost civil. Apparently this new reality from an Islamic country has upset OBL and his “crazies” as they recently threatened Libya. OBL sure is a disgrace to the world especially the Moslem world!!!

3. North Korea is still uncivil but is contained. With the opening up of rail traffic between North and South Korea after 50 years and with the assistance of the US Navy in retrieving NK ships and personnel, a fresh sense of civility is afoot.
4. NK has finally started to destroy in nuclear weapons’ capabilities.
5. Northern Ireland is finally at peace.

6. The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful.

7. Bin Laden has been cornered under a rock in Western Pakistan since 9/11.

8. Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan.

9.Timothy McVeigh was executed. Terry Nichols will follow soon.

10. Eric Rudolph is spending three life terms in prison with no parole.

11. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Kaczynski, the "nuns" from Rwanda, and the KKK were all dealt with and either eliminated themselves or are being punished.

12. Islamic Sudan, Darfur and Somalia are still terror hot spots.

13. The terror and torture of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo and Kuwait were ended by the proper application of the military forces of the USA and her freedom-loving friends. Radovan Karadzic was finally captured on 7/23/08 and is charged with genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the law of war -- charges related to the 1992-1995 civil war that followed Bosnia-Herzegovina's secession from Yugoslavia.


14. And of course the bloody terror brought about the Japanese, Nazis and Communists was with great difficulty eliminated by the good guys.

Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | September 11, 2008 9:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment

AMH,
R U nuts? have been on leave since march,2003?

what does Iraq and the one million dead Iraqi have to do with 9/11??

By all means the perpetrators of 9/11 should be chased to the end of the world and persecuted.

Posted by: Asim, San Antonio | September 11, 2008 8:28 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Thanks Daisy.

Well-articulated postion that speaks for me.

Posted by: Asim, San Antonio | September 11, 2008 8:19 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: Terri | September 10, 2008 11:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Daisy says:
“I must admit that I cannot provide a simple solution to this conundrum of religion and politics,”
I do. Separate the church from the state. The West does. It is the Muslim societies who do not. You accuse the present president for using his religious faith to wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan. He merely reacted to a terrorist attack carried out by some thugs in the name of your religion. We did the same with Japan when it had attacked us.

Posted by: AMH | September 10, 2008 8:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin has what appears to be an accurate biography of Sarah Palin. There appears to be nothing in the information provided that she ever tried or would try to impose her religious beliefs on anyone.

Her support of using Federal tax dollars to build two bridges to isolated towns in Alaska is disturbing. An overzealous governor trying to max out federal funding for her state? All governors appear to do that.

Now we just have to get her educated about the flaws and errors of the major global religions especially Islam and Christianity!!

Posted by: Concerned The Christian Now Liberated | September 10, 2008 5:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Ms. Kahn, I can agree with most of your concern about the connection between Gov. Palin's Pentecostal background and her practice of politics. I am not so concerned, however, with the specifics.

If Gov. Palin were to make decisions about matters of public policy or investment solely on the basis of divine "messages" we would be entitled to think her to be a nut case. Even the saints that receive such inspirations, and even the biblical prophets, challenged such inspirations with their own experiences and the power of their own reason. Accounts of such challenges from the prophets abound in scripture.

I see no reason to believe that Gov. Palin does not do the same.

On the other hand, one can become so fearful of letting one's religious background "interfere" with the job of statecraft that one becomes, in effect, a secularist. This became the stance of Senator John Kennedy in his run for the Presidency in 1960. This may be honest politics, but it is highly dishonest to ones faith tradition. A person can be honest both religiously and politically if one is willing to be honest with the people about the sources of one's beliefs and policy prescriptions, and if one is willing to engage others on differences.

Posted by: Fr. Larry Gearhart | September 10, 2008 5:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"Palin Must Shift from Parochial Religion to Universal Politics"


She can go do that on her own time.

America is under no obligation to put a Dominionist radical one McCain palpitation away from the nuclear football and hope she figures it out.

Posted by: Paganplace | September 10, 2008 4:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company