America's First Muslim Senator? Islam's Growing Political Power

Two very different events unfolded in Michigan within a matter of days--and together they revealed something important about America's changing religious and political landscape.

On August 2, tens of thousands of Shiite Muslims filled the streets of Dearborn for the annual Arbaeen procession, commemorating the death of Hussein ibn Ali, a central figure in Shiite Islam. Widely circulated estimates placed attendance near 45,000, although a definitive official count has not been released. 

The religious procession that has grown substantially over several years.

Two days later, Abdul El-Sayed narrowly won Michigan's Democratic nomination for the United States Senate. He now faces Republican Mike Rogers in November. Should El-Sayed win, he would become the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Senate.

The two events were separate, but the larger picture should not be ignored.

Islam is becoming more confident, organized and politically influential in America. At the same time, much of the American church is becoming increasingly divided, timid and absent from the public square.

Muslims still account for only about 1.2 percent of American adults. Christians, by comparison, represent approximately 62 percent. Yet cultural and political influence is not determined by numbers alone. It is determined by conviction, organization, institutional strength and the willingness to act.

That is what makes the sight of tens of thousands of Muslims marching together so significant.

They were willing to close businesses, rearrange schedules, travel considerable distances and bring their children into the streets for a public expression of religious identity. Their faith was not hidden inside a mosque. It was visible, communal and unapologetic.

Contrast that with much of American Christianity.

The United States contains tens of millions of professing Christians, thousands of churches, large Christian universities, national ministries and vast media networks. Yet it is increasingly difficult to imagine 40,000 or 45,000 Christians gathering in one American city around a clear biblical concern--especially without becoming consumed by denominational rivalry, political infighting or arguments over personalities.

The problem is not that Christianity lacks people or resources. The problem is that it increasingly lacks cohesion, confidence and courage.

Many churches have taught believers to treat Christianity as a private therapeutic experience rather than a comprehensive worldview. Christians attend services, listen to sermons and then return to a culture being shaped by people who possess a much clearer understanding of institutional power.

Islamic communities are organizing. Secular progressives are organizing. Socialists are organizing. LGBTQ activists are organizing.

Too often, Christians are merely watching.

El-Sayed's victory did not happen overnight.

After losing Michigan's 2018 Democratic gubernatorial primary, he built a media platform, cultivated progressive alliances and developed a statewide political organization. During his Senate campaign, he reportedly held more than 500 events and assembled approximately 12,000 volunteers. He then defeated an establishment-backed member of Congress despite more than $60 million in outside spending throughout the contest.

That is how political influence is built: patiently, locally and persistently.

Michigan's concentrated Arab and Muslim communities have learned that population alone is not enough. They are developing candidates, registering voters, building advocacy organizations and making their priorities impossible for political parties to ignore.

Michigan has demonstrated how a highly engaged religious and ethnic community can become decisive in a closely divided state.

This should concern Christians--not because Muslim citizens lack the right to participate, but because the church has frequently surrendered the very forms of civic engagement that other communities are using effectively.

Influence flows toward those who show up.

The Dearborn march should force Christians to ask an uncomfortable question: What still possesses enough spiritual importance to bring American believers into the streets?

Christians will attend concerts, sporting events and political rallies. They will mobilize around celebrity pastors and presidential candidates. But where is the sustained Christian movement defending unborn life, biblical marriage, parental authority, persecuted believers, religious liberty or the nation's support for Israel?

There have been important exceptions, including large prayer gatherings and pro-life events. But these increasingly appear as isolated moments rather than evidence of a unified, disciplined Christian public witness.

Muslims in Dearborn did not appear embarrassed by their religious clothing, symbols, banners or beliefs. Meanwhile, Christian leaders are often afraid to mention Jesus at a civic ceremony, pray publicly in His name or explain why biblical truth should shape public policy.

This is not tolerance. It is unilateral surrender.

Christians have been trained to believe that bringing their faith into public life is dangerous "Christian nationalism." Yet when other religious and ideological groups openly organize around their values, their activism is praised as representation, inclusion and empowerment.

A society cannot long survive under such a double standard.

The concern surrounding El-Sayed should not simply be that he is Muslim. Article VI of the Constitution expressly prohibits religious tests for public office. Muslim Americans possess the same constitutional rights as Christian, Jewish, Hindu or atheistic Americans.

The legitimate concern is the agenda being advanced and the coalition carrying it forward.

El-Sayed is not merely a religious-minority candidate. He is a leading figure within the progressive movement. His platform includes Medicare for All, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and ending what he describes as unconditional American military assistance to Israel. He has received support from figures including Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

His victory therefore represents the intersection of several increasingly powerful forces: Muslim political activism, democratic socialism, anti-establishment populism and the Democratic Party's growing hostility toward Israel.

That coalition is especially significant for Bible-believing Christians.

For years, progressive activists and Islamist organizations have cooperated around shared political causes despite profound disagreements over sexuality, religious law and social morality. Their common ground is frequently opposition to conservative Christianity, Western cultural traditions and Israel.

Such alliances may eventually fracture, but until then they remain politically effective.

El-Sayed is now one general-election victory away from entering the Senate. Whether he wins or loses, his primary victory has already demonstrated that the movement behind him can defeat the Democratic establishment in a critical battleground state.

For decades, Christians were told that religion must remain private.

Prayer was removed from schools. Biblical morality was dismissed as sectarian. Christian businesses were pressured to abandon their convictions. Public officials were warned against speaking openly about their faith. Churches were encouraged to avoid controversial cultural questions in order to remain "relevant."

Many Christians accepted the arrangement.

But the public square did not become neutral. It was filled by competing religions and ideologies.

Every society is ultimately governed by a vision of human nature, morality, justice and truth. Secularism has its doctrines. Progressivism has its sacred causes. Islam possesses its own understanding of religion, family, law and public order.

When Christians withdraw, they do not create neutrality. They create a vacuum.

The answer is not hostility toward Muslim neighbors, discrimination or the denial of anyone's constitutional rights. Christians are commanded to love their neighbors and proclaim the Gospel to all people.

But love does not require blindness.

Christians must understand the theological and political differences between Islam and Christianity. They must defend the freedom to preach that Jesus Christ--not Muhammad--is the way, the truth and the life. They must resist efforts to subordinate constitutional liberties to any religious legal system, whether Islamic or otherwise. And they must reenter the public square without apology.

The most important lesson from Michigan is not simply that Islam is growing.

It is that Muslims are organizing while Christians are retreating.

America's future will not be shaped merely by the community with the greatest population. It will be shaped by the community with the deepest convictions, the strongest institutions and the courage to carry its beliefs into public life.

The church still has the numbers. It still has the resources. Most importantly, it still possesses the truth.

The question is whether it still has the courage to stand for it.