In a not too distant future, a Plastic Bag goes on an epic journey in search of its lost Maker, wondering if there is any point to life without her. The Bag encounters strange creatures, brief love in the sky, a colony of prophetic torn bags on a fence and the unknown. To be with its own kind, the Bag goes deep under the oceans into 500 nautical miles of spinning garbage known as the North Pacific Trash Vortex. Will our Plastic Bag be able to forget its Maker there?

I like to take time with novels I read; thirty or forty pages, let it sink in, and then come back tomorrow. I was not afforded this luxury with Confessions of a Teenage Jesus Jerk. The book is simply too engaging.

Gabe, our hero, is a California teen with good friends, raging hormones, fascination for the world, and anxiety about becoming an adult. A textbook teenager. What sets Gabe apart is that he is one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a religion that shields him the evils of his surroundings. The “world” is a dirty word.

Like all adolescent Jehovah’s Witnesses, Gabe’s future is prescribed: get married as soon as possible to a wholesome fellow Witness and become a full time door-to-door minister. Getting married is necessary because sex outside of marriage will get you disfellowshipped, shunned. And there is no point in going to college and pursuing a secular career because Armageddon is coming soon, maybe tomorrow.

Author Tony DuShane, a former Jehovah’s Witness, uses his first novel to spill the beans on what it is truly like to be a young JW. It’s fascinating and scary. Gabe and his friends crack each other up by writing curse words in the margins of bible study magazines. They go to Jehovah’s Witness conventions to scope out cute young sisters from other congregations, where the excitement of getting a phone number or an address is tantamount to getting a BJ on the first date. But even holding hands is a no-no, unless you are engaged to be married. Gabe, who has never seen a real, live boob fantasizes about a gray haired woman wearing a support bra in his mom’s medical supplies catalogue. Parts of this book will make you laugh out loud.

It’s only when Gabe gets disfellowshipped, cut off from his friends, his congregation, and everything that he has ever known, that he is given a pause, a perspective. He is an outsider of outsiders, which makes him realize that he is an individual in need of community. But above all, he is an individual.

File Jesus Jerk under “Coming of Age” novels. He is challenged, he learns, he grows, and ultimately gains a better understanding of the world. But in this tale the reader gains a better understanding of the world as well. A coming of age novel done right.

President Barack Obama’s nomination of Francis Collins to head the National Institutes of Health is good news for scientists, for people of faith, and for all Americans. Dr. Collins, a preeminent geneticist and devout Christian, is highly qualified for the job because of his skills and his values.

In the 1990s he led the Human Genome Project at NIH, which helped unlock the human genetic code, a key to finding cures and treatment for a wide range of diseases. Collins also knows how to translate complex scientific concepts into plain English, which is essential given the rapid pace of technologies that affect our lives. Collins is a person of deep faith—the nation’s top scientist believes in God.

This last quality is important, for it signals that the hyped conflict between science and religion has no place, either symbolically or pragmatically, in the work of the Obama administration. And certainly there is a lot of work to do, especially in Dr. Collins’ particular policy area of interest—personalized medicine—potentially one of the most important fields of science to emerge from the Human Genome Project for everyday Americans.

Suddenly, the war between religion and science seems so “last century,” a sort of obsolete appendage that has no function in today’s world. It is true that the politicizing of certain conservative religious creeds by the Bush administration—funding abstinence-only programs in schools when factual evidence showed their ineffectiveness, for instance, or limiting the use of U.S. aid funds overseas if the recipients offered abortion counseling—did real damage and should not be minimized. But the overstepping of narrow sectarian beliefs, which was pervasive in the last administration, did not represent the authenticity of diverse faith traditions in America.

What’s more, the yell fests that have raged on TV, radio, and print, pitting atheist scientists against literal creationists—or whatever the polarized extremes happened to be—seem increasingly unhelpful to the challenges that face all of us, whether atheist, agnostic, doubter, seeker, or believer.

This is not to say that religion and science will not again be used against each other, or that creating an alliance between the two is easy. But these realms are not as oppositional as they once seemed. Most major religions continue to be shaped by advances in science, incorporating new understandings of how the world works to broaden and deepen their comprehension of the divine.

Dr. Collins understands all this. His intellectual curiosity, scientific expertise, ethical depth, and commitment to alleviating suffering make him the right man for the job. And he’s very good at explaining his faith and his science to everyday Americans. What more could the senators who need to confirm him to the post need to know?

Article also appears at The Center for American Progress.спални

Some people are quick to ridicule faithful religious adherents. But me? I envy them. I envy the ability to believe that there is something out there just for you – a plan or a specific place. It’s comforting aspect cannot be overstated. The mental peace that comes with having a direction for your life is amazing. I know. I used to believe. Strongly. Wholeheartedly.

And though I don’t regret where I am now, sometimes I wish for simpler times. Complete faith. It reminds me of childhood – how my parents took care of everything – clothing, food, shelter. I may have wanted more or different stuff, but my basic physical needs were met without me worrying about them. They were just there.

It was this great community that I belonged to. It gave me an identity, an instant support group, friends. Kind of like a gang. It was a constant thing. I could go to church every week and if I wanted more, Wednesday and Friday nights too. I could participate in a culture that I was a part of. There was a wonderful sense of belonging and love. Even if I didn’t get along with everyone and vice versa we all shared something in common: our faith.

And now, life is more complicated. I used to think the phrase “ignorance is bliss” was the most ridiculous statement ever. But I get it. I can’t change how I feel, what I know or who I am. I can go through the motions, but the connection is gone.

I still like going to church. Not for the sermons (no offense to my pastor friends) but because of the fellowship. It’s nostalgic, comforting, and fun. It provides the familial aspect that I miss. I even wanted to get involved at one point – teach Sabbath school – but then I realized that it’s more than slightly hypocritical to teach what you don’t really believe. And so I don’t. But it’s hard.

Especially the friends part. You always expect opposition from your parents – completely normal. But it’s different when your friends say they’re worried and praying for you. Being the heathen is a totally different experience. And while I appreciate their concern it does get on my nerves sometimes. Amazingly parents are more supportive than some of my friends. Who knew?

I still pray – though sometimes it’s more like talking to myself and hoping someone is listening. I haven’t completely given up on the idea of God. If I’m scared, deliriously happy, or just plain miserable I reach out. The truth is I don’t know whether He or She or It exists in the way I was taught. I have serious doubts. Same thing naturally extends to heaven or hell. Seems more likely that it’s been taught for centuries to keep people in line, behave a certain way for reward or escape retribution.

I don’t want to do something because I’m scared or want a crown and my own mansion. I want to do it because it’s the right thing to do. And I think that’s where religions are great – pretty much all of them have the same basic moral code: be good to your fellow man. That’s great stuff. Unfortunately it doesn’t just stop there.

Maybe I’m too blessed, too educated, too jaded. Maybe I have had too much time to think about it. Maybe I need to have an uber-traumatic experience to bring me back into the fold. I probably have to hit rock bottom or the bottom of the barrel or something to realize the truth. At least that’s what I’ve been told. I certainly don’t have the answers. I feel unsettled, uncomfortable, and slightly scared about where my life is going. It would be so much easier if I just believed like I used to.

But I don’t.

Nicole Franklin is a 27-year old, recovering Christian and apathetic law student. She lives with her Scottie puppy Tyler in Nashville, and comes up with brilliant ways to save the world at least once a week. She loves hard, eats well, and dances in her sleep.

Leo Babauta compiled this list of tips for living the golden rule in daily life. Religion teaches the rule, but it’s so not about religion.

One of the few rules I try to live my life by, and fail every day trying, is the Golden Rule.

I love the simplicity of the Golden Rule, its tendency to make I interact with happier … and its tendency to make me happier as well.

It’s true: the rule of treating others as you would want to be treated in their place will ultimately lead to your own happiness.

Let’s say that you apply the Golden Rule in all of your interactions with other people, and you help your neighbors, you treat your family with kindness, you go the extra mile for your co-workers, you help a stranger in need.

Now, those actions will undoubtedly be good for the people you help and are kind to … but you’ll also notice a strange thing. People will treat you better too, certainly. Beyond that, though, you will find a growing satisfaction in yourself, a belief in yourself, a knowledge that you are a good person and a trust in yourself.

Those are not small dividends. They are huge. And for that reason — not even considering that our world will be a better place if more people live by this rule — I recommend you make the Golden Rule a focus of your actions, and try to live by it to the extent that you can.

I will admit that there are strong arguments against the Golden Rule, that there are exceptions and logic arguments that the Golden Rule, taken to extremes, falls apart. I’m not concerned about that stuff. The truth is, on a day-to-day basis, living by the Golden Rule will make you a better person, will make those around you happier, and will make the community you live in a better place.

With that in mind, let’s take a look at some practical tips for living the Golden Rule in your daily life:

1. Practice empathy. Make it a habit to try to place yourself in the shoes of another person. Any person. Loved ones, co-workers, people you meet on the street. Really try to understand, to the extent that you can, what it is like to be them, what they are going through, and why they do what they do.

2. Practice compassion. Once you can understand another person, and feel what they’re going through, learn to want to end their suffering. And when you can, take even a small action to somehow ease their suffering in some way.

3. How would you want to be treated? The Golden Rule doesn’t really mean that you should treat someone else exactly as you’d want them to treat you … it means that you should try to imagine how they want to be treated, and do that. So when you put yourself in their shoes, ask yourself how you think they want to be treated. Ask yourself how you would want to be treated if you were in their situation. John F. Kennedy did that during the controversial days of de-segregation in the 1960s, asking white Americans to imagine being looked down upon and treated badly based only on the color of their skin. He asked them to imagine how they would want to be treated if they were in that situation, and act accordingly towards the blacks.

4. Be friendly. When in doubt, follow this tip. It’s usually safe to be friendly towards others. Of course, there are times when others just don’t want someone acting friendly towards them, and you should be sensitive to that. You should also be friendly within the bounds of appropriateness. But who doesn’t like to feel welcome and wanted?

5. Be helpful. This is probably one of the weaknesses of our society. Sure, there are many people who go out of their way to be helpful, and I applaud them. But in general there is a tendency to keep to yourself, and to ignore the problems of others. Don’t be blind to the needs and troubles of others. Look to help even before you’re asked.

6. Be courteous in traffic. Another weakness of our society. There are few times when we are as selfish as when we’re driving. We don’t want to give up the right of way, we cut people off, we honk and curse. Perhaps it’s the isolation of the automobile. We certainly don’t act that rude in person, most of the time. So try to be courteous in traffic.

7. Listen to others. Another weakness: we all want to talk, but very few of us want to listen. And yet, we all want to be listened to. So take the time to actually listen to another person, rather than just wait your turn to talk. It’ll also go a long way to helping you understand others.

8. Overcome prejudice. We all have our prejudices, whether it’s based on skin color, attractiveness, height, age, gender … it’s human nature, I guess. But try to see each person as an individual human being, with different backgrounds and needs and dreams. And try to see the commonalities between you and that person, despite your differences.

9. Stop criticism. We all have a tendency to criticize others, whether it’s people we know or people we see on television. However, ask yourself if you would like to be criticized in that person’s situation. The answer is almost always “no”. So hold back your criticism, and instead learn to interact with others in a positive way.

10. Don’t control others. It’s also rare that people want to be controlled. Trust me. So don’t do it. This is a difficult thing, especially if we are conditioned to control people. But when you get the urge to control, put yourself in that person’s shoes. You would want freedom and autonomy and trust, wouldn’t you? Give that to others then.

11. Be a child. The urge to control and criticize is especially strong when we are adults dealing with children. In some cases, it’s necessary, of course: you don’t want the child to hurt himself, for example. But in most cases, it’s not. Put yourself in the shoes of that child. Remember what it was like to be a child, and to be criticized and controlled. You probably didn’t like it. How would you want to be treated if you were that child?

12. Send yourself a reminder. Email yourself a daily reminder (use Google Calendar or memotome.com, for example) to live your life by the Golden Rule, so you don’t forget.

13. Tie a string to your finger. Or give yourself some other reminder throughout the day so that you don’t forget to follow the Golden Rule in all interactions with others. Perhaps a fake golden ring on your keychain? A tattoo?

14. Post it on your wall or make it your home page. The Golden Rule makes a great mantra, and a great poster.

15. Rise above retaliation. We have a tendency to strike back when we’re treated badly. This is natural. Resist that urge. The Golden Rule isn’t about retaliation. It’s about treating others well, despite how they treat you. Does that mean you should be a doormat? No … you have to assert your rights, of course, but you can do so in a way where you still treat others well and don’t strike back just because they treated you badly first. Remember Jesus’ wise (but difficult to follow) advice: turn the other cheek.

16. Be the change. Gandhi famously told us to be the change we want to see in the world. Well, we often think of that quote as applying to grand changes, such as poverty and racism and violence. Well, sure, it does apply to those things … but it also applies on a much smaller scale: to all the small interactions between people. Do you want people to treat each other with more compassion and kindness? Then let it start with you. Even if the world doesn’t change, at least you have.

17. Notice how it makes you feel. Notice how your actions affect others, especially when you start to treat them with kindness, compassion, respect, trust, love. But also notice the change in yourself. Do you feel better about yourself? Happier? More secure? More willing to trust others, now that you trust yourself? These changes come slowly and in small increments, but if you pay attention, you’ll see them.

18. Say a prayer. There is a prayer on the Golden Rule, attributed to Eusebius of Caesarea, that would be worth saying once a day. It includes the following lines, among others: “May I gain no victory that harms me or my opponent.
May I reconcile friends who are mad at each other.
May I, insofar as I can, give all necessary
help to my friends and to all who are in need.
May I never fail a friend in trouble.”

If punk rock songs are short, loud, offensive, and give a big F.U. to the mainstream, then Michael Muhammad Knight’s new novel, Osama Van Halen (Soft Skull Press) is very punk rock.

The barely there, comic book plot of Osama Van Halen is sketchy at best: Rabeya, a feminist punk Muslimah, and Shi’ite skinhead Amazing Ayyub hold actor Matt Damon hostage with an AK-47. When the two Muslim punks get separated, we follow Ayyub on a cross-country trek on mission to assassinate a band of pretty-boy Muslim punk posers. On the quest, Ayyub encounters zombies in a mosque, psychobilly spirits, and sexual perversions aplenty. Oh yeah, he also uses a Qur’anic spell to turn invisible.

But the real story of Osama, and the reason that this book is worth reading, is Michael Muhammad Knight’s ongoing internal clash; balancing his American punk philosophy with his Islamic faith (a theme Knight wrote about brilliantly in his visionary first novel, The Taqwacores).

Knight places himself as a character in the novel, which is not an original concept. But what makes it fascinating is that Knight’s character is the actual author of the book, interacting with the characters he has created. He writes about himself in the first person, then seamlessly switches to third person, referring to himself as “Michael Muhammad Knight”. Literary boundaries are blurred in a way that hasn’t been done before. But this is punk rock, and that’s what punk rock does.

Fan of Knight’s first novel, The Taqwacores may be disappointed with his new offering. The character development that drove Taqwacores and made the reader weep when the hero dies, and made the reader gasp when Rabeya did the unthinkable is no where to be found in Osama. But Osama is not a novel in the traditional sense. It is a concept. It’s an American Muslim’s emotional therapy session, disguised as a zombie porno mag.

In 2001 Sam Harris was a graduate student in neuroscience. But like so many people, 9/11 radically altered his life. Seeing affluent young men kill themselves and others in the name of their God led him to conclude there was something fundamentally wrong with many of the world’s religions. The fruit of his effort to expose and confront what he interprets as the violence, sexism, homophobia and inherent irrationality of the world’s largest faiths became a best-seller, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. Unsurprisingly, Harris was flooded with angry hate mail, typically from people who identify as deeply religious. He decided to respond en masse with his follow-up effort, Letter to a Christian Nation (Vintage), another best-seller. Harris’s Letter to a Christian Nation triggered a flood of media coverage. I spoke with Harris about his thoughts on religious fundamentalism, atheism, and terrorism.

You started writing The End of Faith right after 9/11, I wondered if you could talk about what inspired you to do that?

Sam Harris: It really was my immediate response to September 11th and continues to be my response to the fact that every time I open the newspaper, fully half of the news, often unacknowledged, is coming out of the religious divisions in our world. We are continually bearing witness to how maladapted and unnecessary these religious ideas are.

Besides writing, what can one do to push the rationality agenda?

I think it has to come from media of all types. What we need essentially is a Fahrenheit 9/11 scale wide-release documentary on this subject.

Your book proceeds from looking at the polling data on people who think that God created the Earth in seven days, which is staggeringly high; and then the percentage of people who believe that God directed evolution, which is also staggeringly high, as compared to the percentage the people who accept the scientific consensus about evolution, which is very low. But at the same time, science is winning the battle over teaching evolution in schools. It seems to me that this would be unsustainable in a democratic country if 90 percent of people actually found scientific evolution offensive. So how do you explain those numbers?

There’s a margin of error and there are subtle differences in polls. For instance, a recent Gallop poll found that 53 percent of Americans believe the universe is 6,000 years old and we evolved not from prior species but from Adam and Eve. The percentages are always massive, something like 70 percent believe in hell, 68 percent believe in Satan. There are so many specific questions being asked, it’s not just “Do you believe in God?” that I do trust the poll results, but I find them no less shocking.

It’s important to point out that this is a significant minority. This is not a majority. Something like 45 percent of us go to Church every week or more and believe very literalist things. If 44 percent of people claim to believe that Jesus is coming back in their lifetime, that is an eruption of medievalism in the heart of our democracy that I think should trouble everyone.

But there’s another 45 percent who are moderate in their beliefs, and do accept evolution. But many of them think that evolution has been guided by God. What that means in its particulars is that it’s difficult to spell out and no doubt, there are many millions of people who pay lip service to God guiding evolution, but what they really mean is that the universe is vast and mysterious and there is some kind of energy out there that maybe we don’t understand.

But if you poll people on a Friday and ask them what they are doing over the weekend, the percentage of people who say they are going to Church will be higher than the number who actually go. Isn’t it possible that these numbers skew a little bit toward religion simply because Americans feel some obligation to answer that way, for the same reason majorities say they would vote for an African-American or a Jew, but never do in the voting booth?

But what’s interesting is that they would not vote for an atheist. The same poll run with the subject of atheism produces very different results. An atheist is the only person who could not get a majority of his own party, if you stipulate that he is a qualified candidate. And that’s not true of Muslims, or Jews, or homosexuals. And so I just think there are many reasons to believe that atheism is the most reviled variable around which someone can organize in this culture.

We’ve run a lot of articles on CampusProgress.org about how you can be a good Christian and accept homosexuality, or reproductive freedom, or evolution. What do you think?

It’s a bit of a paradox. On one level I want to support these people and I argue that we do need more interfaith dialogue, more religious moderation. So religious moderation is the goal on one level, and it’s certainly better than religious fundamentalism.

But religious moderates are just reliably deluding themselves about as to where their moderation is coming from. Their moderation is not coming from looking more closely at their holy books. It’s not coming from God. It’s not coming from a plausible reading of their texts. It’s coming from the hammer blows their religious tradition is suffering from modernity. It’s coming from a collision with science and secular politics and a larger world of discourse, which is eroding the basis for their religious certainty. The reason we’re not burning religious heretics on street corners under the name of Christendom, Christianity now, like we were in Europe for five centuries, is because Christianity has been mastered and subjugated by post-enlightenment discourse to a significant degree.

Unlike most atheists who say religion can be interpreted by bad people to support their beliefs, you actually think religion is the source of bad beliefs, such as martyrdom in Islam.

If you want to explain why there seems to be an inexhaustible supply of suicide bombers in the Muslim world, I think you really need look no further than the doctrine of martyrdom and jihad that is professed ad nauseam in these jihadist circles and probably even wider circles within Muslim discourse. It explains it. And it explains why this behavior is actually sometimes independent of education or economic opportunity, or even independent of having a history of being mistreated by Western powers or anything else. It explains why we have some psychologically healthy, well-off, well-educated, and unmolested people blowing themselves up or flying planes into buildings. We really do have that in the Muslim world, and it is behavior that is utterly inexplicable without reference to what these people actually believe.

So you’re saying is that if the world converted en masse to Jainism or Quakerism that there would in fact, be much less terrorism, crime, or war?

There is no question that behavior would be different. There’s no question if your core religious belief, which trumps all others, is that non-violence is the most important thing, don’t kill people under any circumstances, not even in self-defense. If your daughter is getting raped by pirates, you are simply to watch because it is worse for you to lift a finger against the pirates. If this is the way you view the world, and I am not saying this is a good way to view the world, it has very different behavioral consequences. You know what someone who really believes that is going to do in various situations of oppression. They’re not going to blow up little kids in pizza parlors, on buses, or in discotheques just to make their point.

The funny thing about you saying Islam is to be blamed for the terrorism originating in the Middle East is that it puts you in agreement with neo-conservatives and also Christian American zealots.

It’s an interesting paradox of sorts. My argument is really orthogonal to our political discourse. What I say about Islam lines up much more to what neo-conservatives and even Christian lunatics say about Islam. And what I say about Christianity lines up with what liberals and people who think that Islam has been basically misconstrued say about Christianity. It’s a bewildering conversation to have when you try to have it in the midst of our normal political polarities. I find it inconvenient that the people who see the problem of Islam most clearly in our society are our own religious demagogues. That’s scary because we don’t want that. We don’t want religion playing both sides of board in that game. And it’s starting to. It’s certainly playing the board on the Muslim side. And there are many Christians who are angling for a showdown for biblical reasons. That’s what I’m worried about. Until liberals admit that there are tens of millions of people far scarier than Dick Cheney in the Muslim world, they’re just out of the conversation.

This article was originally published in Campus Progress.

For over two decades, the Muslim Public Affairs Council has been a leading national voice on behalf of the Muslim American community. MPAC works with policy leaders, law enforcement agencies, the entertainment industry, and others to shape policies and public opinion concerning Muslim Americans. MPAC also works within Muslim American communities to develop strong leadership and encourage civic participation.

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad is MPAC’s government relations director. She talks with Sally Steenland of the Center for American Progress’ Faith and Progressive Policy Initiative about the challenges facing Muslim Americans in a post 9-11 nation, the images of Muslims in the media, and her community’s hopes for the new administration.

Sally Steenland: Safiya, you’re the Government Relations Director for the Muslim Public Affairs Council here in Washington D.C. Can you tell us about MPAC—why it’s needed, not just for the Muslim community, but for all of us?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad:The Muslim Public Affairs Council came about in about 1988, so we have been around for about 20 years. We originated in Los Angeles as the public relations wing of the Islamic Center of Southern California, and we’ve grown to expand our offices around the country. MPAC operates on the core belief that we’re trying to create a shift in U.S. policy, and that requires more from our community, but it also requires building bridges and coalitions with other groups at the grassroots and national level. We are trying to build those bridges, but we’re also trying to create a stronger voice in the media. There is a void of thoughtful analysis of the Muslim American community, of the issues at play.

Sally Steenland: Let’s talk about some of the policy issues you are working on and some of the media issues as well. I know that you have an office in Hollywood, and you have a project on Islam. What do those projects do?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: We instituted our Hollywood bureau about a year ago. We had been seeing a shift in public opinion of Muslims. A lot of what you see in the movies and TV is a Muslim playing the role of a terrorist. That becomes a formidable concept in the minds of Americans –that this is what Islam and the Muslim community represent. So we decided to create a Hollywood bureau which serves as a bridge between the Muslim community and the entertainment industry. We reach out to filmmakers, writers, actors, Hollywood professionals, and we talk about the issues that pertain to the Muslim American community. We also look at scripts and review shows, so we are able to say, “Look, this is how you portrayed a Muslim. Maybe you could do this instead or maybe you could show them praying in this way, in a more positive light.” And it’s actually been really positive. We’ve seen a lot of feedback from our Hollywood partners in asking us and seeking our advice.

“Project Islam’ is a program we implemented a few years ago [to equip] communities with the skills to address difficult questions….our religion [was] put in the spotlight after 9/11 and [we] were questioned about issues that are difficult—about polygamy, the role of terrorism or jihad. Sometimes our community members aren’t prepared to answer those [questions].

Sally Steenland: When you work with Hollywood and in communities so that there’s a more accurate reflection of who Muslims in America really are, what do you think some of those obstacles are?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: There are very few positive images of American Muslims portrayed on a broader level. So you’ll see Osama bin Laden tapes being played over and over again, where he is calling for jihad on America, but you don’t see, for example, an organization called Green Muslims that helps save the environment based on an Islamic perspective. Or you don’t see groups like MPAC that are calling out against terrorism and violence in any and all forms.

There’s a disconnect between what people are seeing and [who] Muslims [are.] Also, we’re still dealing with post 9-11 repercussions. We’re seeing an increase in employment discrimination, in cases where our community members are being questioned unnecessarily by the FBI and law enforcement.

Sally Steenland: Can you give us a sense of what a pre-9/11 world was and what a post-9/11 world looks like for the Muslim community in America?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: A lot of my work deals with young Muslims, and the reason we’re trying to engage [them] is because many who are reaching college age right now don’t remember a pre-9/11 world. They were very young when 9/11 happened and all they’ve seen is the backlash. They’ve seen Guantanamo, they’ve seen Abu Ghraib and this is what they’re beginning to understand of U.S. foreign policy or domestic policy. What we’re trying to do is to include them to be engaged citizens, to work with government officials, to engage their local law enforcement, to be active citizens.

Some of the post-9/11 repercussions have to do with “home-grown terrorism.” I know that the Senate and various government agencies are extremely concerned about young American Muslims who are born and raised here becoming radicalized and then carrying out acts of violence on U.S. soil. This is something that hits a nerve with a lot of us because it raises you to a suspect class. You’re born and raised here, but your allegiance to this country is still in question because you could be affiliating with terrorist groups or messages that are calling for violence.

Sally Steenland: If you could advise the Senate committees that are holding hearings and the FBI and the police forces that are working on this—and maybe in some cases you are—what would you say?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: I think the language that’s being used is extremely problematic. These hearings are called ‘Violent Islamic Radicalization,’ ‘Violent Islamist Jihadization.’ You are pushing people away from dialogue and discussion by language like that, because you’re equating violence and terrorism with our religion. Just like other religions, there are bad people carrying out acts of violence in the name of their religion…we don’t ascribe to those beliefs, but immediately are linked.

I have pushed the Senate Committees to change the language that’s coming out of our government to a more friendly, engaging atmosphere that brings young Muslims in….they’re always talking about young Muslims who are becoming radicalized, but they don’t have young Muslims testifying. They don’t have [them] coming forward to represent their own community.

Sally Steenland: Have you seen any hopeful signs based on your work?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: MPAC has testified before Congress on these issues, and I think they are reaching out to [us] and other Muslim groups for feedback, ideas, engagement….but in some ways, like the language issue, we’ve pushed for the last eight hearings for them to change the title, and that hasn’t been effective. But they’re trying to engage us and there’s hope with the new administration that there will be a shift.

Sally Steenland: What are your hopes for the new administration?

Safiya Ghori-Ahmad: On the campaign trail where we reached out to the American Muslim community [with] the get-out-the-vote initiative, I saw that so many people felt a change in rhetoric, a shift in the tone of the government in how they are going to engage the Muslim world and Muslims in general. Young [and] older Muslims felt like they were being included in this message of change and hope.

Sally Steenland: If you had to give us a snapshot that was reflective of the realities of Muslim American communities, what would you say?

Ghori-Ahmad: There’s always a preconceived notion that when you say “Muslim” you’re thinking South Asian, Pakistani, Indian, or Arab; but in fact the majority of American Muslims are native born, so they’re African American Muslims; they’re indigenous. About 35 percent are indigenous Muslims, which is more than the other groups. Arabs come in at about 24-25 percent, then South Asians at about 18 percent, and so you’re seeing this shift, especially[with] young American Muslims, where we’re not as affiliated with our ethnic background. Many times you’ll ask young Muslims where they’re from and their first response is, “America.”

Steenland: I want to go back for a minute and talk about some preconceptions people have and some things people say that they may not be aware of. One of the things you hear people say is, “He’s a moderate Muslim” or “She’s a moderate Muslim.” And that word “moderate” is meant to be a compliment, and I think you would probably say it is not. What’s wrong with saying that?

Ghori-Ahmad: I am one of those people who don’t like being called a moderate or progressive Muslim because moderation, to me, is a mainstream term. Moderation is inherent in our religion, in the Qu’ran, in what we’re taught all our lives. You can be an American and you can be a Muslim at the same time. Right now the definition has taken on a political twist where, after 9/11, you’ll see groups use “moderate Muslims” to portray themselves as a watered-down version of being Muslim.

Steenland: Can you talk about any generation gap that exists in the Muslim American community?

Ghori-Ahmad: I definitely think there’s a generation gap in our community right now. Often times our parents came here as immigrants, or if they are indigenous, their main priority was to build Mosques and community centers as a place for worship and gathering as a community. …..you’re seeing a shift in our generation into civic engagement and political activism. That’s a divide. The elder generation doesn’t think that is a priority. It’s sort of the immigrant mentality where, “we’re here, we want to make money, we want to have families, and we want to have a place to pray.”

But we’re seeing a more nuanced understanding of being an American Muslim in our generation where we’re trying to get more involved, whether politically or civically. I think that has caused rifts in some communities. Additionally, you’re seeing a void in some Mosques where the leadership is still the elder generation and you don’t see as many young Muslims stepping up to the plate to take leadership roles in their communities. Now that’s not universal, but those are some issues that are definitely inherent in the community right now.

Steenland: Let’s say you’re coming from a traditional community….Can you talk about the desire and appeal of assimilating and being an American, but at the same time, the appeal of tradition and of deeper roots within one’s own circle?

Ghori-Ahmad: I definitely think there is a conflict that probably many young Muslims feel in terms of, how far can we go? And these are issues we’re trying to have addressed in our Mosques and with our leaders…you do see that struggle and you’re constantly questioning, “Am I American? I’m South Asian at home.” You speak a different language, you pray five times a day, you dress differently, you eat different foods, and then it’s like you’re two lives.

I think everyone comes to a point, usually in college, where they reconcile those two identities and begin to understand what being an American Muslim is, and that you can be both. You can wear your jeans and go to the movies and talk about sports, and at the same time you can still make time to pray five times a day, you can make sure that you’re following the traditions that are set forth by the religion.

Steenland: If you had to list some of the top issues facing the Muslim American community this year, what comes to mind?

Ghori-Ahmad: Unfortunately we’re still dealing with post-9/11 issues. We’re still engaging with federal agencies and members of Congress to address issues like the Patriot Act, to address the ramifications of legislation that adversely affects the community. On the flip side, we’re also hoping that our community is beginning to understand and engage in the civic process at a more enhanced level. I think that this election brought the community to the forefront in terms of voting and volunteering for campaigns, and that was a good thing…. But we need to see more of that on the local and the grassroots [level].

Another issue is shifting from foreign policy to domestic policy. You can ask our community members, “What’s the most important issue to you?” and for the most part – this isn’t even a generational issue – you’ll hear, “Palestine” or “Kashmir” or “Afghanistan.” I think that we – MPAC – we’re trying to shift the focus from foreign policy to domestic policy because health care is just as important to us; we’re living in America. Immigration is just as important. There’s a host of domestic issues that are equally important but may not get the kind of relevance in the community that they should.

Steenlandcarrier to noise ratio: I have one last question, and that has to do with your hopes for the next four years and beyond. If you had a wand and could help shape the Muslim American community in this country, what would you like to see and what are your hopes?

Ghori-Ahmad: I really do hope that we’re going to see a more diverse administration. We’re already seeing that, but I hope to see more Muslim Americans involved in the political process, more engaged, and not just in the law enforcement field. We’re not just here to talk about national security, but to address a whole host of issues and be looked at as equal stakeholders in the progress of America and the economic outlook for America. I do think we can look beyond 9/11 and the level of suspicion that we’ve seen ourselves cast in for the last few years and move beyond that. I hope for the next four or eight years that this administration will bring change to where our community will begin to feel like they’re a part of the system.

This interview also appears on Center for American Progress.

We received a submission from Anthony Morley, a self-professed computer nerd and lover of Christ. He presents an amusing perspective–comparing Christians to “spam infested computers”– that only a computer nerd and lover of Christ could give.

It seems Christians have fallen into our own little identity crisis. We’ve seem to be victim to an identity theft. We’ve lost who we are as Christians.

We’re like spam infested computers that run for God. We are slowed down and lost somewhere between our creation and our “shut down”. Our identity has been stolen away by no one aside from ourselves.

It’s hard to recognize someone who has their faced blacked out. Our sin and denial can cause God to overlook us. Why? He didn’t see the Christian we were made to be, someone yell “identity theft” for me! We let people dictate our every day life. The American culture, the immoral society, all the sin in our lives affects our faith. We begin to become apathetic, we don’t want to be forgiven, we’d rather be enveloped in our own sin.

God is pretty much our unique firewall. He helps block incoming junk. But how often do we turn God off? And by the time we turn him back on, we have already been stolen and destroyed from the inside out. Society has fought hard to push God from our schools, our homes, to push him far from any place they feel that He “invades”. This is an extremely costly mistake; where can we go without God? Thankfully, God is willing to scan, erase, and defrag our systems.

Hebrews 4:16 says, “Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”

God is forgiving. He is willing to wipe the slate clear, He wants a place in our life. He wants to impart mercy and grace into our lives, to bless us with prosperity. Remember to run to the feet of Christ to repent and ask for forgiveness. God will not turn you away, He waits for you to come home to His arms. He loves you, He forgives you, and He accepts you. What more can we ask for as sinners?

When Not About Religion.com asked me to read and review I’m Perfect, You’re Doomed: Tales from a Jehovah’s Witness Upbringingby Kyria Abrahams, my first reaction was “No! I do not want to read the jaded woe-is-me stories of a former Jehovah’s Witness!” I’ve lived that; I’m in therapy I don’t need to read about it.

Then I started reading.

The memoir of Kyria Abrahams is a painfully honest look at her experience growing up as a Jehovah’s Witness, coming of age in a loveless marriage and then being shunned by everyone she trusted including her own family.

This is a story about being raised in, and exiting a cult. What’s not to love?

Abrahams speaks candidly of her experiences as an alcoholic OCD cutter and her failed suicide attempts. You won’t be calling your physiotherapist in tears at the end though. Abrahams writes about her life with an amazing sense of humor that will have you rolling on the floor in laughter while you try not to pee.

Her memory of being caught masturbating on her beanbag at an early age by her mother, then tearfully praying for God’s forgiveness will make you raise your eyebrows and laugh hysterically while you call your friends to read the passage, then the chapter. The next thing you know, it’s 3 a.m and you’ve finishing the book over the phone (a true story).

For those unfamiliar with Jehovah’s Witness lingo Abrahams has included a glossary in the back, which is insanely accurate. For instance:

The Good News –The Joyful knowledge that soon, Jehovah is going to destroy the world!

Pagan –The bisexual girl in your computer science class who wears Tevas with a velvet cape and keeps trying to invite you to her winter solstice cookout and drum circle. I think she owns ferrets.

A great read for anyone who was a JW, knew a JW, or spoke to a JW on your doorstep. Hell, read it if you picked on a JW. When you’re finished, look them up to apologize. Their lives were hard enough.

Abrahams offers no judgment for or against a strict religious upbringing. She only tells of one person’s experience with it: Live and let live, if it doesn’t work out move on and turn it into a tremendous slam poem and stand up comedy act while frantically making an “oober halloween costume”, committing adultery, and getting an education beyond the Bible. Sins are easier to complete while multitasking.

Become a Jehovah’s Witness for 338 pages, close the book and bake a birthday cake.

Hilary D. La Riviere is a social service provider and former Jehovah’s Witness from Portland, Maine.