Kate Norlander

There are people who believe that some human beings have more inherent worth than others.

This post is not for them. Although I strongly disagree with that belief, the purpose of this post is not to argue against it.

I’m writing to people who believe that all human beings have value. That, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights.” That all humans are made in God’s image. You, reader, may not believe all of these things, but if you believe even one of them, I’m writing to you.

How would the world change if we truly lived according to what we believe?

How would we treat immigrants?

What would the grand jury have decided in the case of Marshae Jones if they had recognized her human dignity as well as that of her fetus/unborn child?

How would we treat strangers on the Internet when we disagreed with them?

Who would we choose for President?

How would I respond to the driver who disregarded a traffic law and nearly hit me?

How would we treat poor people?

What if we commit to start consciously thinking of the human dignity of every person we encounter — in person, on the phone, or online? What would the world look like if we started treating our fellow humans as if they were truly valuable, simply because they exist?

Suppose I were to tell you that if you want to make a difference, it’s important to take a stand against torture.

What’s going through your head right now?

What do exactly to you mean by “torture”?

In this post I’m referring to the United Nations’ definition: “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”

But isn’t it effective?

Absolutely not. Studies show that the most effective way to gather valuable intelligence is through rapport-building, not torture.

Not only is torture ineffective, but, as a story in The Guardian points out, it extracts a cost, including to the reputation of a country that engages in torture.

Even if it were effective, there are two additional arguments against it:

• It’s illegal. Several U.S. laws forbid torture. So do international laws established under the Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Convention, both of which are supported by the United States.
• It’s unethical. Speaking as a Christian, I cannot claim to follow Jesus (who was himself a victim of torture) if I support torture. Commands such as “turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies” contradict torture. And many, including the late Senator John McCain, argue that this practice betrays our highest ideals, including a belief in the dignity and rights of all human beings.

Torture was a problem in the 2000s, but it’s not really going on now, is it?

Unfortunately, as recently as 2017 a UN human rights investigator claimed that the U.S. was still torturing people at Guantanamo Bay. And President Trump has made it quite clear that he has no problem with torture.

Of course I’m against torture! But what can I do about it?

• First and foremost, speak up. If the subject comes up during conversation, explain your position. Write to your senator or representative if they say that they are in favor of using torture. Write a letter to the editor if it comes up in the news. Use whatever platform you have to express your opposition to the practice.
• Support an organization that advocates against torture or that serves victims of torture, such as Amnesty International or the Center for Victims of Torture.
• Invite someone to speak about the subject to your faith community, workplace, or school. Both of the organizations that I mentioned above have speakers available.

While the U.S. may not be using torture the way it did 15 years ago, it’s still an issue. We need to take a stand against this immoral practice.

It may be seem odd to say that you can help change the world simply through being clear and direct. But if you think that assertive communication isn’t a good way to make a difference, just remember a time when you felt frustrated because someone expected you to read their mind.

Want better relationships? Stop doing these things.

When we refuse to communicate openly with someone, we damage our relationship with them. Poor communication can frustrate the other person. It can cause distance between us, because we aren’t being authentic. And it can lead us to feel resentment toward others when they fail to read our mind.

Here are the things we need to stop doing if we want to improve the way we communicate with others.

• Stop using a passive-aggressive communication style. When you choose to be passive-aggressive rather than communicating directly with someone about your wants, you drive that person away. I know a woman whose mother-in-law rarely communicates directly. Instead, she drops hints, tries to guilt people into doing what she wants them to do, and sometimes uses the silent treatment when she is offended. One of her relatives, who wasn’t calling her often, got a Christmas card with the message, “Hope you have a desire to talk to me again.” Needless to say, the relative wants to call this woman even less than they did before receiving the card.
• Stop dropping hints. Hints are another form of passive-aggressive communication. Some hints can be so subtle that you miss them. Others are obvious and annoying. The passive-aggressive mother-in-law I mentioned above dropped several obvious hints about wanting to be a grandma when she decided that her son and daughter-in-law had waited long enough to have children. “I picked up a high chair at a garage sale,” she’d say. One time she told my friend about a niece’s wedding, adding, “I bet my brother will be a grandpa soon.” My friend said she had to resist responding with “Why? Was it a shotgun wedding?”
• Stop expecting other people to read your mind. Don’t assume others think like you. If something is important to you, spell it out. I know… if you tell your significant other that you’d really like flowers for a special occasion, that takes all the romance out of it. But even less romantic is getting mad at them, because they didn’t figure out that getting flowers was very important to you. Either be clear and direct with them, or promise yourself you won’t get upset if they don’t figure things out.
• Stop refusing to share your thoughts and feelings. I confess I’m particularly guilty of this one. But when we fail to share our true selves with others, we’re holding them at a distance. We are perhaps even lying about who we are. If you want closer relationships, you need to be willing to share yourself with others.
• Stop using an indirect approach to your request. Has anyone asked you, “What are you doing on Tuesday night?” That sort of request can set a person on edge. What are you getting yourself into if you say “Nothing”? You could wind up being invited to a sold-out concert that you really wanted to attend… or asked to go to a multi-level marketing pitch. Do people a favor: Don’t leave them wondering if they are going to regret saying, “Nothing.” Be direct and ask, “Do you want to go to X on Tuesday night?” They’ll like you better for your directness.

Why aren’t we better communicators?

• We know something is none of our business. When the mother-in-law I referred to above hinted that she wanted a grandchild, she may have chosen that route because she knew that the choice was ultimately in her son and daughter-in-law’s hands (assuming they were able to have children — my friend has said she was glad she wasn’t struggling with infertility when her mother-in-law made those insensitive remarks). If something isn’t any of your business, it’s best to just keep your mouth shut.
• We’re afraid. We fear rejection. We fear being ridiculed. Although assertive communication comes from a place of strength, it makes us vulnerable, and being vulnerable is very scary.
• We think that if people really loved us, they’d do what we wanted them to without our saying a thing. We tend to believe that the way we see the world is “normal.” If we make a big deal out of other people’s birthdays, we may expect the same from them. But they may not care much about birthdays. Better to let them know that birthdays are important to you (and, while you’re at it, to listen to how they want you to handle their own birthday).
• We don’t like conflict. I know I’ve brought up the passive-aggressive mother-in-law several times now, but the stories involving her make great examples. What if her son and daughter-in-law decided that they didn’t want children? What if they had said as much to her? While this wasn’t the case, I’m sure there are plenty of people who don’t communicate unwelcome news like this simply because they don’t want to deal with the conflict that will happen within their family.
• We think that assertiveness is too self-centered. Sometimes we confuse assertively communicating our desires with being self-centered. It’s okay to speak up about what you want. In fact, unless you are a saint, if you refuse to speak up about what your desires (“I’d like you to cook more often,” “I’d rather not see that movie, because violence makes me uncomfortable,” “I’d like to stay home for Christmas this year rather than visiting relatives”), you will eventually become resentful about the fact that your wishes are never taken into account. It’s okay to say what you want. The self-centered part is expecting always to have your way.
• Women are sometimes told that they can’t be assertive with men because of their “fragile male egos.” All too often, I have seen people argue that if women are critical, men’s fragile egos are damaged. I have a higher view of men than that. While no one likes to be constantly belittled or picked at (something I alluded to in my post on Love and Respect), both men and women are capable of handling constructive criticism. Otherwise, how would they ever survive the workplace?
• We may have been taught that assertive behavior will be punished, and passive behavior will be rewarded. If you are met with anger or stony silence when you speak up and are praised for being “good” when you swallow back your thoughts and feelings, you’ll learn that assertiveness gets you nowhere. Likewise, you may have learned from the example of others if you saw that they were punished (yelled at, fired, cut off from the family, etc.) for speaking up.
• People have indicated that they aren’t interested in what we have to say. If someone tells you outright that they aren’t interested in your thoughts and opinions, or if they send that message through actions such as interrupting you or refusing to let you get a word in edgewise, you may be inclined to give up trying to communicate assertively with them.

What does assertive communication look like?

• You clearly state what you want. You won’t always get what you want. You’ll hear “no,” and that’s okay. But even if you’re used to manipulating your way to “yes,” having better relationships is worth hearing “no.” So ask for help. Ask someone out. Tell someone you’d like to pick the restaurant this time. Let your friend know that you’re tired of them cancelling on you every time their significant other calls.
• You get to the point. When you’re ready to ask for something, don’t take an indirect approach. Get straight to the point. The other person will  appreciate the opportunity to say “no,” rather than feeling that they’ve been backed into a corner.
• You share your opinions. Don’t be afraid to disagree with someone — whether the conversation is about politics or favorite movies. There’s no guarantee that the other person will receive your opinion well, but if you respectfully share your thoughts, allowing others to disagree with you just as you expect them to allow you to disagree, you may be able to spark genuine dialogue between people with different points of view.
• You know when to keep your mouth shut. As I mentioned above, some things are none of our business. In those cases, direct questions or requests such as, “I’d like to be a grandparent. Will you be trying to have children soon?” are no better than hints.

Poor communication stunts relationships. If you’re genuinely concerned about making a difference, start practicing a more assertive communication style. Your friends, family, and coworkers will thank you for it.

Although it was published roughly 15 years ago, Emerson Eggerichs’ Love and Respect remains a popular marriage book among evangelicals. The premise of the book is that women desire love above all else and that men need respect. Eggerichs’ solution to marriage problems is for women to unconditionally respect their husbands and men to unconditionally love their wives. This is drawn from Ephesians 5:33: “Each of you, however, should love his wife as himself, and a wife should respect her husband.” Eggerichs believes this shows what wives and husbands need from each other, as well as what comes most naturally to them. (Men are not commanded to respect, because they are naturally respectful. Women are naturally loving.)

There are many good critiques of Love and Respect out there, including concerns about how it portrays sex and about the way it encourages women to tolerate abuse.

I’d like to focus on one facet of the book: the notion that respect can be separated from love.

Would you rather have love but no respect or respect but no love?

Eggerichs claims that, if they had to choose between love and respect, women would choose love. Men would choose respect.

But this presents a false choice. Such choices do not occur in the real world. More importantly, while you can respect someone without loving them, you cannot love a person if you have no respect for them.

Don’t believe me? Check out some of the synonyms for disrespect: contempt, disdain, scorn. Even some of the softer synonyms, such as rudeness, are not signs of love, as the Bible itself says (1 Corinthians 13:5).

If my husband told me that he loved me but didn’t respect me, I wouldn’t believe that he loved me. And if I told my husband that I respected him but did not love him, I wouldn’t blame him if he asked me for a divorce.

Square peg, round hole

Eggerichs is so determined to make his idea fit the fabric of reality that it feels like he’s forcing it. He’s intent on teasing love and respect apart, assigning one to women and the other to men. He fails to see how respect is inseparable from love, how both men and women need love and respect, and how neither quality necessarily comes naturally to people of a certain gender.

One of his stories in the book illustrates this well. In his words, his wife “complained about every crumb on the counter, every shoe on the floor, every wet towel left on the bed, every candy wrapper that missed the wastebasket.” She “saw the light” when she returned from a trip and realized her family was happy not to have to hear her tell them to clean up after themselves.

Of course, I was not present to see how this played out. Maybe his wife was overly critical. Maybe she was unkind in the way she expressed herself. None of us, men or women, appreciate being criticized continually or harshly.

But look at things from her perspective. What messages were family members sending with their inability to simply pick up after themselves, getting their trash into the trashcan, hanging up their towels, and putting away their shoes? “We see you as a maid. Your job is to pick up after us. We don’t have enough respect for you to put forth the little bit it effort it takes to clean up our own messes.”

Their behavior could be seen as both disrespectful and unloving. Eggerichs’ wife resented it and responded accordingly. She may not have responded in a way conducive to helping him change, but the fact that she was upset by disrespectful and unloving behavior should surprise no one.

Do complementarian men respect women?

Eggerichs makes it clear he is a complementarian as he draws distinctions between men and women. Complementarians believe that men and women have different but complementary roles.  Although men and women are equal in God’s eyes, men are the natural leaders. Through the lens of complementarianism, the biblical word “helpmate” (ezer cenegdo in Hebrew) means that the woman’s role is subservient to the man’s. She is there to play the supporting role in his life story.

Egalitarians interpret ezer cenegdo differently. They point out that the word ezer implies power to help, not inferiority; in fact, there are multiple instances in which God is referred to as Israel’s ezer. The word cenegdo implies equality. In this interpretation of “helpmate,” the woman is the man’s powerful equal. Being a geek, I imagine the two standing back to back, swords drawn. They have each other’s backs. The woman doesn’t play the supporting role in the man’s story. Both husband and wife are equal partners.

It’s easy to see a correspondence between Eggerichs’ views about the roles of men and women and his lack of concern for how his wife felt about his messiness. Because woman was created by God to be man’s “helpmate,” it follows that she shouldn’t complain about her husband’s inability to hang up his towel or get his trash in the trashcan. She is there for him. Why should he care if she’s constantly picking up after him?

I’m sure there are women in complementarian marriages who feel respected by their husbands, but I think that’s because they have good husbands, not because the complementarian view of men and women is good.. If wives exist for their husbands, then their own hopes, dreams, goals, and desires don’t matter. This is hardly a recipe for respectful treatment of women.

Love matters to men, too

I’ve focused on the way Eggerichs separates respect and love, but I want to make it clear that his notions are not only unfair to women, they’re unfair to men. Google “wife doesn’t love me anymore” and then tell me that men don’t care about being loved.. Look at Eggerichs’ list of “how to spell love to your wife” and tell me that men don’t also want things like openness, understanding, peacemaking, and loyalty.

Want to make a difference? I am speaking especially to the evangelical community here: Don’t buy into the notions of this book and ones like it. When we try to force men and women into rigid boxes, as Eggerichs does here, we do them a disservice. Want a good marriage? Work on loving and respecting each other — regardless of gender differences.

When someone says, “I’m spiritual, not religious,” they usually mean that they have a spiritual life without ties to a particular religious institution. They may be fed up with religious hypocrisy or feel that they don’t fit in with any particular group. They may dislike the strictures of worshiping in a particular place at a particular time with a particular group of people. Whatever the reason, they’ve rejected organized religion but not the notion of spiritual experiences.

The first time I heard someone say the opposite — “I’m religious, not spiritual” — that person went on to clarify what she meant. Religion caused her to love actively (my words, not hers). It was why she might show up at your door with a casserole if you were a new mom. She didn’t think she’d feel this same call to action if she identified as spiritual rather than religious.

Google “religious but not spiritual,” and you’ll find riffs on that theme. The people who write about being “religious but not spiritual” believe that religion calls us into community and into action. For them, the danger of spirituality is a lack of connection to others. Religion leads them to express love through concrete actions.

“Spiritual but not religious” people have a point when they complain about hypocrisy or empty religious rituals. But people in the “religious but not spiritual” camp are right to point out that our spiritual impulses must manifest themselves in action. Spirituality and religion are nothing but feel-good emotions if they are not bathed in the particularities of service to others.

A recent viral post shines a light on something that far too many mothers have experienced: the feeling of isolation that can occur when no one steps in to help (and, I might add, when fathers do not step up to their fair share of parenting tasks, which is not “helping,” it’s being a dad). The person who created the post shared about a family party they witnessed, during which a mother was left on her own to entertain her baby. “Either no one noticed the subtle work she was doing,” the poster wrote, “or no one wanted to give up their enjoyment to let her have a taste of it too.”

I’m sure this woman’s family would say they loved her, but at that moment she needed someone to show it. She needed someone to share the work of childcare so that she could be a part of the celebration. (Some comments on this post point out that the woman could have asked for help. While they are right, I understand why she may have been hesitant to do so. When my child was small, I was afraid of “using up” an invisible, finite pool of help available to me. I didn’t ask for help because I was storing up my requests in case I experienced a real crisis.)

I’m not trying to condemn anyone who calls themselves spiritual or religious… or neither of those things. But if we aren’t living out whatever we believe through concrete actions, how meaningful is our love? Let’s commit to an active love that serves others.