I once served on the staff of a church with four congregations divided among language groups: English, Spanish, Korean and Indonesian. The pastor of the Indonesian congregation had fled with his family to the USA literally in order to stay alive. He had been a Christian pastor in Indonesia and had been targeted by a radical Muslim group. He is a man marked by compassion and great enthusiasm for life, and it was an honor to work alongside him.
When praying, preaching or just speaking about God in Indonesian, he used the term "Allah." When speaking English, he said "God." Islam is a religion, not a language, even though the use of Allah in Indonesia and other majority-Muslim countries is because of the dominance of Islam, clearly those Christians - and Jews, I believe - who would have the most reason to shy away from the term don't see the need.
So while Newt Gingrich in this interview is telling bald-faced lies to the surprise of absolutely no one, it's also true that one could make a theological case that "Allah" is entirely appropriate for a truly ecumenical prayer that doesn't elevate one particular religion over another.
My personal preference would be for there to be no prayer at any government-sponsored function, whether it's a legislative meeting or anything else. But it's always fascinating to me how these people can be so consistently wrong on so many levels.
(via)