Earlier this month, tragic news from Texas brought the abortion debate into sharp focus. According to a media report, a pregnant woman died because medical staff delayed care due to fear of legal repercussions under the state's strict abortion laws. Such stories underline the life-threatening consequences of restricting reproductive rights.
Vice President Kamala Harris made abortion rights the heart of her campaign, but President-elect Donald Trump first waffled on his positions on abortion but towards the end of his campaign he finally admitted he would "not support a federal abortion ban, under any circumstances." But the abortion rights activist fear Trump might do the opposite. America may become intolerant to unwanted pregnancies. It may become a place where coming out of the closest could be looked down upon.
In any case, across the US, 41 states now enforce abortion bans, many with minor exceptions. Thirteen of these have outright bans, leaving women with few options even in cases of severe health risks.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, countries like Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia enforce equally harsh abortion restrictions, rooted in religious principles. In Iran, the Youthful Population and Protection of the Family Law, introduced in 2021, has made obtaining an abortion even harder, emphasising state control over women's reproductive choices.
What ties these regions together is a shared ideological conservatism-one that prioritises the moral sanctity of foetal life over women's autonomy. In both conservative US states and Islamic fundamentalist societies, the convergence of politics, religion, and societal norms has turned women's health into a battleground.
I am writing these lines from a liberal man's perspective but I often hear in my Muslim friends and families' circles strong arguments in support of abortion bans.
The idea here is to show that the two sides might be sworn enemies, almost incapable of seeing eye to eye, but quite interestingly they speak the same ideological language and practise the same dogma. Whether it's on religion or abortion or whether it's on the role of women and their collective disdain for gay people. It's hard to believe how much they have in common-until you remember they can't stand each other. I'm talking more Evangelicals in America and Muslim fundamentalists in the Islamic world.
Two sides of the same ideological coin
Strange bedfellows? politically yes but ideologically not quite. They are more like two sides of the same ultra-conservative coin, but wittingly or unwittingly locked in a battle of supremacy.
Recently, the world watched, as a young Iranian woman staged a bold protest, removing her hijab and clothes in public at a university, defying a government that enforces compulsory hijab laws with a heavy hand. Her act of rebellion harks back to the tragic case of Mahsa Amini, a Kurdish-Iranian woman who died in police custody in 2022 after being detained for not wearing her hijab "properly." The nationwide protests following Amini's death highlighted the deep resentment against these restrictive laws.
So, in one world-the conservative US states-women fear criminalisation for seeking abortions, bound by laws that strip them of autonomy over their own bodies. In another world-places like Iran-women defy oppressive mandates, risking everything to assert their right to freedom.
I have often wondered about two things, without giving them much thought: how the Evangelicals of America and the ultra-fundamentalists of Iran and other Islamic states, such as Saudi Arabia, seem to speak the same language and use identical idioms-yet why do they hate each other despite being cut from the same ideological cloth? But first, let's take a quick look at some of the views the two sides share on a variety of issues.
Family Values, a cornerstone of society: Both Islamic and Evangelical fundamentalists emphasise the centrality of the family as a divinely ordained unit. In many conservative Islamic societies, family is seen as the bedrock of a society, based on morality, with strict roles for men as providers and women as caretakers. I believe the family structure is designed to preserve religious and cultural traditions. Evangelical Christians in the US similarly prioritise family roles. They too advocate for traditional gender roles, with the husband as the head of the household and the wife in a submissive role. Both groups view the family as under attack from liberal views of secularists, such as single parenthood, same-sex parenting or gender fluidity. They see these views as a threat to social order.
Homosexuality is against nature: Conservative Rev Jerry Falwell had once said: "AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals". Ayatollah Abdol-Hamid Masoumi-Tehrani, an Iranian cleric, has referred to homosexuality as a "moral corruption" and aligned it with societal decay, suggesting that such behaviour brings misfortune upon communities, a sentiment echoing Falwell's rhetoric.
Homosexuality is widely condemned in conservative Islamic contexts, often punished severely, including imprisonment or even execution in some countries. Gender fluidity is considered unnatural and an affront. Evangelicals oppose same-sex marriages and gender identity rights, viewing them as sins. For them, only two genders exist -- male and female
Liberal Values as Satan's Workshop: Both Islamic and Evangelical fundamentalists reject liberal values, associating them with moral decay and godlessness. In Islamic societies, liberal ideas like freedom of speech, individualism, and secularism are often condemned as corrupting influences from the West, undermining culture and morality. Music, art and media that challenge traditional norms are viewed with suspicion. Evangelicals similarly view liberal values, such as LGBTQ+ rights, reproductive freedom and secular governance, as evidence of a decay.
If their views on many issues converge and overlap, why do they hate each other? I think it stems from historical, cultural and political factors. Let's consider the following:
Historical Hostility and Religious Exclusivity: Both Islamic and Evangelical fundamentalists claim exclusive access to ultimate truth, which puts them in opposite camps. One set of people views the other as misguided at best or heretical at worst.
Historical Conflicts: In the Islamic world, children in educated families grow up knowing about the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition and centuries of atrocities committed by the Catholics against Muslims. Centuries of historical clashes have left deep scars on their psyche. Evangelical Christians often see Islam as a "threat to Western civilisation," while Islamic fundamentalists view Christian missionaries and Western expansion as attempts to undermine their culture and religion.
Cultural Hegemony and Identity Politics: Their shared ideological views are overshadowed by cultural and nationalistic narratives that pit them against each other. Evangelicals in the US often see themselves as defenders of a "Christian America" against perceived external threats. Political rhetoric about the "clash of civilisations" feeds into this dynamic, painting Muslims as adversaries in a broader cultural war. Islamic fundamentalists often see Western Christian powers, including evangelical movements, as aggressors trying to impose their values and political dominance on Muslim-majority societies. The US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and evangelical missionary activities are often cited as examples of Western hostility.
Political Alignment and Global Power Dynamics Following the 9/11 terror attack, President George Bush declared a war against Islamic terrorism. For the proposed war, he used the word 'crusade', which stirred old hostilities between Christians and Muslims. The choice of the word 'crusade' coming from the US president may just have been accidental but that was not how it was viewed in the Muslim world. He came in for a massive criticism by Muslim leaders. Many Evangelicals support US foreign policies that are perceived as hostile to Muslim-majority nations, such as unwavering support for Israel, military interventions in West Asia and policies against Muslim immigration.
Media Narratives and Fearmongering Both groups are often manipulated by political actors and media to stoke fear and division. In Western narratives, Islamic extremists are often portrayed as violent ones while Evangelicals are projected as defenders of Western values.
Rivalry in preaching their religious faiths: The two groups' approaches to spreading their faith also create conflict. Evangelicals actively proselytise, often working to convert others. Islamic fundamentalists also promote dawah (inviting others to Islam), but their efforts are often localised or defensive, aimed at countering Western influence rather than converting Christians.
In a world where identity politics often outweigh shared ideologies, I tend to believe that these two groups are unlikely to find common ground despite their similar stances on family, gender and morality.
