Getting Biblical in Daily Life
Multi-Culturalism and Pluralism
"Multi-Culturalism" just means the ability of different cultures to live together. But Isaiah portrays a world of intense cultural conflict. Judah, Israel, Ephrain, Egypt, Moab, Assyria, Ethiopia, and plenty of other places all have a great deal of trouble coexisting with one another.
On the one hand, the solution Isaiah proposes to this problem is to have everyone eventually worship Israel's God. That's, admittedly, one idea. But the solutions favored by most democracies today are pluralistic, meaning that you accept multiple religions, multiple cultural expressions in one society. Isaiah has little hints of a more all-embracing perspective. Though he still wants everyone to worship one God, he sees even Israel's former enemies getting brought into harmony and peace.
He writes,
And the Lord shall smite Egypt: he shall smite and heal it: and they shall return even to the Lord, and he shall be intreated of them, and shall heal them. In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians. In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land. (19:23-24)
Isaiah's not trying to exclude anybody—provided they're not wicked. Foreigners and eunuchs, and people who would normally be rejected from the Temple, are going to get brought into a relationship and a covenant with God in the end.
So, even though Isaiah isn't about to tolerate the worship of other gods or have that kind of religion or cultural pluralism, no human beings are excluded from his vision either (as long as they act justly). Everyone winds up having a share in God's kingdom.
Women's Rights
Although Isaiah does urge people to take care of widows—which is a much more pro-woman position to take than not taking care of widows—he is very strongly opposed to immodesty (or so-called immodesty) in women. This seems more than a little politically incorrect in our day, but it lies at the root of some of the issues surrounding the role of women in the different Abrahamic Religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), so it needs to be discussed.
For example, Isaiah inveighs against the women of Zion:
Because the daughters of Zion are haughty and walk with outstretched necks, glancing wantonly with their eyes, mincing along as they go, tinkling with their feet; the Lord will afflict with scabs the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will lay bare their secret parts. (3:15-17)
This is immediately followed by God saying that he will take away all the bracelets, anklets, scarfs, perfume boxes, nose rings, and plenty of other objects from the women of Zion, reducing them to a state of poverty, sickness, and degradation.
Most believing Christians and Jews probably wouldn't think that haughtiness and "wanton glances" are deserving of such outright humiliation and wrathful vengeance. They're not exactly on the same level as neglecting the welfare of orphans and widows. So, from any humane perspective, this is pretty unpleasant stuff. Should it discredit Isaiah in the eyes of its modern day readers, those people who tend to think that, say, wearing bracelets actually isn't some sign of sinful immodesty?
Well, since Isaiah keeps swinging from wrath to mercy—and since everything points towards mercy in the end—it implies that people should switch their own perspective towards mercy and tolerance. It's highly debatable whether the way God behaves in the wrathful parts of Isaiah are meant to be models for the way human beings should behave or organize their societies. It seems almost like God has become momentarily out-of-control in Isaiah, though for the necessary purpose of crushing his people down in order to remake them into a new shape. But obviously, the way Isaiah expresses that in his comments on women seem to be thoroughly reprehensible to most people, of whatever religion, in the present day.