Why do we refer to the "Prophet Mohammed"? Do we say: "Our Saviour Jesus Christ"?
We've all made the mistake, which may be very telling. But why do we non-Muslims persist in referring to the, "Prophet Mohammed"? Do our journalists and politicians, let alone Muslims, refer to "Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ"? Is this what they call: "Dhimmitude"?
The media and political reponse to the massacre by Islamists in Paris on Wednesday -- and, yes, we all know that most Muslims are not terrorists and do not condone the killings -- occasions a reminder of something that should have been addressed long ago.
Why, oh, why, do we persist in referring to the founder of Islam as, "The Prophet Mohammed"? Heaven, as it were, help us: even The Commentator and its contributors have been at it.
Surely, it's one thing, and it's fine, if practising Muslims do it. After all, they're, Muslims, and for them Mohammed is indeed, "The Prophet". But Christians, atheists, secularists, Jews, Hindus and so on don't believe that.
It is worth reflecting that our media, politicians and Muslims in the West and elsewhere never refer to Jesus as, "Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." But Christians believe that Jesus was (and remains) exactly that. Why is Islam accorded a degree of deference that is not accorded to Christianity, or indeed any other religion?
It is surely a sign of how much we have already conceded of our own volition. We are not, after all, being forced to do this. So far as I am aware, not even the more extreme Muslim clerics have issued us with any such demand. We seem to be obeying Sharia law before it has even been imposed.
Self-imposed "Dhimmitude", anyone? Just a thought...
We are wholly dependent on the kindness of our readers for our continued work. We thank you in advance for any support you can offer.