“I have seen him tie up a lame young woman, and whip her with a heavy cowskin upon her naked shoulders, causing the warm red blood to drip; in justification of the bloody deed, he would quote this passage of [Biblical] Scripture -- ‘He that knoweth his master’s will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes …’”
So writer, orator, and freed slave Frederick Douglass described in his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. His almost 200-year-old-description parallels multi-cultural practices of religious texts being used to support dangerous, discriminatory acts.
Religious rhetoric has similarly been used to describe “a woman’s place” in the household, equate dark-skinned people to animals, or dehumanize the LGBTQ+ community. But how truthful are such claims? Can we truly take the word of singular interpretations of texts, rather than applying our own judgements to the texts themselves?
In the modern scope of mainstream religion becoming more inclusive in regards to sexuality, gender, and race relations, how fundamental can plurality be to the success of religious living?
As many Muslims know, Islam is more than just religion but, rather, a way of life -- permeating throughout our daily routines, our interactions with others, our eating choices, our clothing choices … the list goes on. But this is not to say that we all follow the same daily interpretations of our religion.
With 1.8 billion believers worldwide, there is bound to be variety in Islamic living. The same goes for other mainstream religions. Christianity, with 2.6 billion believers worldwide, and Hinduism, with 1.2 billion, are each examples of diverse and nuanced communities with thousands of years of traditions that have evolved over time.
As a high school student living in the US, I have been asked more than once where my hijab is when I reveal to new friends that I am a Muslim (though many don’t often know the terminology … the response is more so, “You’re a Muslim? So where’s your, you know… *insert vague hand gesture motioning towards the head*”). I hold back a chuckle and explain to them that with almost 2 billion of us worldwide, Muslims each have different interpretations of the modesty prescribed to all believers.
But this understanding of nuance is, unfortunately, not as common as it should be. With violent, forced applications of head coverings occuring in Afghanistan and generations of pseudo-religious turmoil coming to a head in Iran, Muslims across South Asia are being faced with a rigid notion of “the right way to believe.” The right way to dress as a Muslim, the right way to speak as a Muslim, and the right way to live as a Muslim.
Let’s not forget the extent that this can go to, with the Taliban preventing girls from attending school “in the name of Islam.” But doesn’t Surah Al-Alaq, the first verses believed to be revealed to our Prophet, begin with the command that he “read?” And was it not the Prophet’s wife, Khadijah, who became the first believing Muslim after trusting the Prophet’s retelling of these events? And was it not the Prophet himself who reiterated again and again throughout his life that, “... it is true that you have rights over women, but they also have rights over you …”
But the relegating of women under religious basis is not exclusive to Islam. In a controversial sermon delivered in 2021, an American Pastor stated, “... after you get married, the Bible says … First Corinthians 7:4, ‘The wife has no longer all rights over her body … ’ so whenever she's not in the mood, dig out your Bible.”
But truly ask yourself, what religion would encourage its own weaponization? As manmade interpretation faces up against original source material, the danger of misinterpretation of religion becomes more apparent. According to another American pastor, "... why is it so many black basketball stars, black football stars, black baseball stars, want a white wife? Why? ... It's another defiance of God's law."
But there is no evidence from Biblical scripture to categorically support this statement. And the previously mentioned pastor conveniently left out the rest of the Corinthians verse which continued that men’s bodies were also designated to their wives after marriage.
We mustn’t forget that superiority based on race or gender was completely condemned in the Prophet Muhammad (SAS)’s “final sermon,” and Hinduism insists that the divine is equally present in all, with the Rig Veda stating, “... and among these people there are no superiors or no inferiors, no middle ones either.”
And what about the Q’uran, Bible, Vedas, and Old Testament all putting significant emphasis on love, acceptance, and appreciation for our fellow people despite manmade barriers?
So perhaps what stands between us today aren’t the fallacies of religion but instead, the harmful weaponization of religion by man to push forth our own prejudiced rhetoric. If we choose to see the beauty and potential in one another, we can. If we choose to focus on how to distort our perceptions of one another, we can.
So what will it be?
Deya Nurani is a freelance contributor and a high school student based in the US.
