Unity Through Understanding: A Response
Oppression can be quite a subjective term when we really think of it. The first time I saw the illustration shown above I felt a sense of relief, and to be honest a little bit of happiness too. To me this illustration is a depiction of the different views and perspectives that we all have when it comes to identifying and understanding a culture or religion. Simply because we do not agree with a cultural ideal or religious belief, we do not have the right to judge them by our own standards. There is an inherent value that can be found in analyzing ourselves and the way our cultural and religious values have led us to understand society the way we do. Oftentimes, without realizing it we misinterpret the intentions of others simply because we never take the time to understand the thoughts behind them. We perceive things as bad or oppressive when they don’t coincide or make sense with what we know to be true.
For example, Mona Figueroa mentions in her article “One Nation Under (a Christian) God”, “the chapter 1 Corinthians 7:1–40 it states the wife does not have authority over her own body but her husband does, it also states that if you need to fulfill your sexual urges it is better to marry than to burn in hell”. However, I must point out that she fails to mention that in that same book 1 Corinthians, chapter 4, verse 7 it also reads, “. . .Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does”. The Bible does not refer to having no agency over yourself, rather it refers to the idea that upon entering in marriage, sex is an act of giving and receiving. It is not meant for only fulfilling your own sexual pleasures and desires. You should seek to understand the needs of your spouse. Also, 1 Corinthians 7:9 says, “But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn” (KJV). In this verse it does not speak of burning in fiery depths of hell. In this chapter, the apostle Paul, gives the suggestion that if possible, an individual should try to maintain their abstinence in order to fully devote their life to Christ. If one can remain single, it detaches them from distractions of this world including sex and marriage so that the individual’s sole focus is placed on God alone. Paul then goes on to say however, that this way of living is not for everyone. When he says. “it is better to marry than to burn”, he is referring to burning in desire or lust, for this in itself can hinder people from reaching a true relationship with God.
By no means is my intention to ever offend anyone. If there is one thing that I have learned in my walk with God it is that I am no better and no more worthy than anyone else, including those who don’t believe. As far as I can see the politicians that are in a place of power, do not have the slightest idea of what it means to be a Christian. Ninety percent may “claim” to be Christians, but they don’t practice Christianity. Christians are called to be understanding of one another and willing to treat each other with respect and dignity despite any religious differences or cultural beliefs. Our worth as Christians is not defined by our works or by our ability to think of ourselves as “good people”. It is only through God’s grace and mercy that we can truly define who we are as individuals. The ultimate goal of Christianity is not to promote fear or oppression. Christianity is meant to promote an ideal of love and acceptance. The gospel is supposed to show others the love of Jesus and the peace that you can find through Him.
All this said, I do not to mean to discredit the very real concerns that Mona Figueroa expresses. I know that it is easy to lump ignorant beliefs with a whole religion when all you’ve ever seen is the ignorance. Therefore, I appreciate that Figueroa keeps an open mind by not attributing all anti-feminist ideals to Christianity. However, in the same way that we as feminists ask that society keep an open mind, I ask that you all keep an open mind about Christianity as well. We should not content ourselves with living in incomprehension about the true ideals of Christianity or any religion for that matter. Figueroa writes, “I can only theorize that with a more religiously diverse and non-religious congress there would be different perspectives on sex and they would hopeful bring the criminalization of sex work to an end”. I can understand how someone who does not identify with this religion can feel this way, however, I don’t necessarily believe this is the answer. I believe that more often than not, inequity perseveres not out of outright hate but rather through an absence of understanding, on all sides.
“my people are destroyed from lack of knowledge” Hosea 4:6
In The Passion of Feminine Difference Luisa Muraro mentions, “. . .its is the politics of relations (which can also be considered the practice of relations). It is this that frees us from the paradigm of equality and the politics of rights, going not against them but beyond them” (80). In the same way, I think that despite cultural and religious differences we could form relationships by listening to the ideas that others have to offer. It is not about extinguishing religion as a whole but about being open and understanding to the needs of all individuals. Our objective should be to reach a consensus that goes beyond our individual beliefs for the better of society as a whole. I speak to Christians and non-Christians alike when I say this: If we were to come together willingly with open perspectives, we would learn that our religious differences are not obstacles to human rights, our inability to see past the familiar and having empathy for one another as human beings is what enables stubbornness, closed mindsets and the ever present concern that is inequality.
