The difference between religious discourses and their point of mutual intranslatability resides, in particular, not in the difference between dogmas, or in their narratives of origine, but in the different regimes, incompatible among themselves, that prescribe and
prohibit the uses of the bodies or institute the visibility of bodies and their accessibility. […] They do contradict each other and fight over the extent to which the sexualized body must be seen as the very site, where signs of purity, election, obedience, sacrifice, ascetism, and alliance are to be made manifest. […] Its a conflict of religious universalisms concentrated around the singularity of the bodily regime that lies at the core of each of these universalisms.
” (Etienne Balibar, Secularism and Cosmopolitanism. Critical
Hypothesis on Religion and Politics, Pos. 443)