Being a Muslim in the U.S. A Letter to a Friend

My dear friend,

I have been living in U.S. for almost two years, in the very “liberal” Massachusetts. I am very lucky to live here and I will show you how this benefits us as Muslim. 

Here, I fond of listening to NPR, National Public Radio, or public TV channel such as WGBH in Boston. Just like in Indonesia, the American conservatives were annoying too. Many talk shows in private radio tend to be conservative, and I cannot stand listening to them, particularly in regard Iraq, Iran and Israel.

NPR saved me because of its “liberal” perspective and balance coverage about many things. Here, everyone had the opportunity to raise his or her perspective. It has various programs just like London BBC channel. This is the best channel for Muslims because it did not preserve the bad image of Islam propagated by several American media, mainly the conservative ones.

Unlike BBC which is mostly funded by the government trough tax, NPR’s funding mostly comes from people, philanthropy, and very limited commercials. They held funding gathering program each year and therefore I voluntarily donated for this station. I felt that my interest as a Muslim was represented in this station and therefore I had to contribute for it.

I think, most of Indonesian Muslims who hate liberalism and secularism must experience a “minority status” to realize the advantage of liberal and secular system. If U.S. were a Christian state, or its policies were based on Christianity, what would happen to the Muslim community there?

What if all American radios or TVs want to be Christian (like “Islamic"); what if the FCC gives privileges upon the Christian station or channel: what would happen to the Muslims? If there is no “liberal” station such as NPR which provides balance opportunity for Muslim, what will happen to the Muslim listeners?

People will realize the benefit of liberalism and secularism when they were minority. Because both systems arose in the West among others in order to protect minorities. Indonesian Muslims, being majority, were totally unaware about the benefit of secularism and liberalism. 

My son is now enrolled in Public school in Newton Centre. Religion has never been discussed in this school although the diversity of religious tradition is widely respected. In last Ramadhan, his teacher called my wife and gave her a story book for children on fasting tradition in Islam. “You need to read this for your kids,” she said. We were touched in that time. Is it possible to happen in Indonesia where hatred and enmity toward Christianity and other religions were preserved in various levels?

In last Ramadhan, Newton Free Library had displayed books and comics about fasting ritual in Islam, therefore public can understand about this Muslim tradition. This custom is applied to all religions therefore one can learn about other’s tradition. Multiculturalism and pluralism were developed among American society so that they respect the diversity of religious tradition.

Religious diversity is respected although religion has never been part of American public school’s curriculum. If Christian family wants their kids to obtain religious studies, they may send them to Sunday schools. Religion becomes the matter of each community. Thanks to secularism and liberalism, Muslim families have never worried that their kids will be stuffed by Christianity which is dominant in U.S.

If only the U.S. government supports the public school to be more Christian, what would happen to Muslims? Yet only in these public schools the immigrant’s children can learn because it is free of charge (including lunch).

Islam in U.S. develop without any restraint because the secular system protects all religions. All sects and school of thoughts enjoyed their freedom, because the state is neutral toward religion and support religions tolerance. Of course, the majority does not need secularism and they probably want their religion to rule. But the minority needs secularism which benefits them in all aspects.

I hear this testimony from several Muslims in Paris when I visited there three years ago. Despite of the problem of headscarf ban, Muslim community assumed that the secular France has benefited them since they can perform their religion freely. Compare this condition with France before the 20th century where even the Protestant, let alone Muslims, underwent pressure, discrimination, abuse and torture from the dominant Catholics,

The proponent of Islamic state would say that Islam guarantees freedom of religion; throughout the history, Islam has given wide tolerance upon other religion. Non-Muslims were given the status of dzimmi by which they can enjoy freedom to perform their religion.

My answer is this. As compared to Christianity, historically Islam had treated other religions with huge tolerance in the medieval period. However, this Islamic tolerance is not sufficient today. We do appreciate Islam for “its historical achievement” but, time has changed and the Islamic tolerance is inferior to the tolerance of the liberal secularism. See comparison as follows:

Imagine bellow condition. If you are, as Muslim in the U.S., were to choose one of the options bellow:

(1) U.S. become a Christian state or adopt Christianity as the state’s religion and make it influential, with requirement that Christianity will give other religions their freedom. 

(2) U.S. become a secular state and neutral toward any religion, but it respects all religions and gives every adherent freedom to profess and practice their respective belief.

As a minority, the second option is more reasonable for Muslims. The first one, although with the promise that Christianity will give tolerance upon other religions, there is no guarantee that other religions would become second class religion.

This condition is also applicable for other religious communities in a Muslim majority country such as Indonesia. Although Muslims promise that Islam will guarantee freedom of religion when it become the state’s official religion or in an Islamic state, or whenever sharia enforced, the non-Muslim are safer to be in a secular state, in the sense it does not interfere religious affair. It is exactly like the American Muslims who feel safe in America which is neutral toward religion.

I think, in an Islamic state or a state that enforced the Islamic sharia, there is always possibility to persecute or discriminate other sect which is regarded as deviant from Islam. History proves this and the European has endured it. Now, Indonesian has slowly followed after what has been abandoned by European for a long time, by persecuting the minority sects, namely Ahmadiyah.

The proponent of Islamic sharia must face this big issue: according to Islamic sharia (Sunni orthodox), anyone who believes in the prophet hood of the founder of Ahmadiyah were infidels and apostates. So, the proponent of sharia will enforce it by expelling or at least limiting the Ahmadi people’s moves, since they were infidels.

Just compare it with the secular system: here, since the state is neutral toward religion, sect, and denomination, the Ahmadi people are able to disseminate their teaching freely. This freedom is valid upon other sect or school of thought also: Shiite, Sufi group of different orders. This freedom is valid for all religions. And this kind of system is applied in America today.

Comparing both systems, it is clear that the secular system is superior, and it cannot be perceived except by minorities. Therefore, Muslims must live as minority within the liberal secular system in order to realized that.

I deliberately give the “liberal” qualification upon this secular word, because there is illiberal secular system. The best example is Soviet Union before its fall. Soviet was clearly secular, but not liberal, because it hated religions including Islam. China is another example: this is a secular state but it is inhospitable toward religion.

Of course there is no perfect system because heaven is impossible to establish on this earth. Heaven just exists in other space. However, human always attempt to reform the social system and institution controlling their life. The secular system arises to respond the condition in which religion based system causes many troubles. The secular system becomes the third way: between coercing religion as a system which is applied for all citizens or hate religion at all. Secular system wants the state to be neutral toward religion, and it also develops respect among religion.

Under this system, minority Muslims would enjoy comfortable religious life in the US, where Islam becomes the fastest growing religion. Is it possible to happen if the US becomes Christian state?

I do not see any clash between Islam ad the concept of secular state in the sense of neutrality toward religion. In this state, the idea of religious freedom and religious protection as the objective of Islam can be achieved better than state which regulate people based on Islamic sharia, in its conservative meaning.