Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A Right to Exist in Mutual Dignity

Opinion

A Right to Exist in Mutual Dignity

Paper cut-outs of people and the earth.

Getty Images, Liliia Bila

The question of Israel's right to exist isn't an abstract debate—it's written in the ashes of six million souls, in the tears of generations, and in the fierce determination of a people who refuse to let their story end in darkness. Any questioning of Israel's right to exist is to whisper that the Jewish people's centuries-long journey of survival, resilience, and hope, somehow matters less than others. As a Black American, I know too well how systems of oppression work to deny people their fundamental humanity.

When Hamas' charter calls for Israel's destruction, it echoes the same dehumanizing logic that has justified countless atrocities past and present. However, there is an inconvenient truth one must remain answerable to. Israel's right to exist doesn't permit any of us to look away from Palestinian suffering. Personal experiences with injustice inform the understanding that pain doesn't cancel out pain. Trauma doesn't negate trauma. The Jewish people have a right to security and self-determination in their uniquely established territorial homeland alongside—not in opposition to—the Palestinian people's right to dignity and self determination in their ancestral homeland.


The evidence of Jewish connection to this land runs deeper than politics. It's etched in stone, written on scrolls, and woven into daily prayers that have been lifted across the diaspora. For three millennia, every Jewish heart has turned toward Jerusalem in prayer; every wedding remembers its destruction, and every Passover ends with the promise: "Next year in Jerusalem." The mantra isn't just ancient poetry—it's identity, memory, and hope, braided together across generations.

Israel's existence isn't validated solely by ancient claims or religious canon. The modern State of Israel emerged in 1948 as the world's belated answer to centuries of persecution, culminating in the Holocaust's unprecedented horror. The United Nations' recognition wasn't charity—it was the international community's acknowledgment that the Jewish people needed and deserved safety to live and thrive.

Today, Israel stands as one of the Middle East's leading expressions of democracy, however imperfect. It's a nation that has absorbed Jewish refugees from Ethiopia to Ukraine, from Yemen to Russia, not without controversy. In a time when antisemitism is surging again—where Jewish students feel unsafe on college campuses and synagogues need armed guards—Israel's existence as a haven isn't a luxury. It's a necessity. And yet, Israel's security cannot come at the cost of Palestinian dignity. Moreover, no individual or nation's security, prosperity, or inalienable rightness should be at the cost of another's! I have stood at the fortified divide of the West Bank, reminded of the visible and invisible barriers that have divided communities globally over the years. When I hear of Palestinian family displacement, I immediately think of the many acts of segregation and forced relocations exacted in America.

The moral challenge of our time isn't choosing sides—it's choosing humanity. It's recognizing that supporting Israel's right to exist doesn't require us to endorse every Israeli policy, just as supporting Palestinian rights doesn't mean accepting violence against civilians brought on by Hamas. We can and must hold space for both and all peoples' legitimate aspirations.

The path forward demands what theologian Reinhold Niebuhr called "moral imagination"—the ability to envision a future and ethics different from the past. All people deserve to live free from fear, raise their children in peace, and build communities where hope outweighs hatred. Israel's right to exist is non-negotiable. Not because it's perfect, again, no nation is. This premise should not diminish Palestinian rights; rather, it sets the stage for genuine dialogue about how both peoples can flourish.

In the end, this isn't just about Israel and Palestine—it's about who we are as a human family. Can we build a world where "never again" means never again for everyone? The answer lies not in choosing between rights but expanding our circle of moral concern until it encompasses all who seek to live in dignity and peace.


Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson is a spiritual entrepreneur, author, and scholar-practitioner whose leadership and strategies around social and racial justice issues are nationally recognized and applied.

Read More

Communication concept with multi colored abstract people icons.

Research shows that emotional, cognitive, and social mechanisms drive both direct and indirect contact, offering scalable ways to reduce political polarization.

Getty Images, Eoneren

“Direct” and “Indirect” Contact Methods Likely Work in Similar Ways, so They Should Both Be Effective

In a previous article, we argued that efforts to improve the political environment should reach Americans as media consumers, in addition to seeking public participation. Reaching Americans as media consumers uses media like film, TV, and social media to change what Americans see and hear about fellow Americans across the political spectrum. Participant-based efforts include dialogues and community-based activities that require active involvement.

In this article, we show that the mechanisms underlying each type of approach are quite similar. The categories of mechanisms we cover are emotional, cognitive, relational, and repetitive. We use the terms from the academic literature, “direct” and “indirect” contact, which are fairly similar to participant and media consumer approaches, respectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

As political violence threatens democracy, defending free speech, limiting government overreach, and embracing pluralism matters is critical right now.

Getty Images, Javier Zayas Photography

The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

The assassinations of conservative leader Charlie Kirk and Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota have triggered endorsements of violence and even calls for literal war on both the far right and far left. Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of Americans reject political violence, but all of us are in a fight to keep our diverse and boisterous brand of democracy alive. Doing so requires a renewed commitment to pluralism and a clear-headed recognition of the limits of government, especially when proposals entail using the criminal justice system to punish speech.

Pluralism has been called the lifeblood of a democracy like ours, in which being an American is not defined by race or religion. It requires learning about and accepting our differences, and embracing the principle that, regardless of them, every person is entitled to be protected by our Constitution and have a voice in how we’re governed. In contrast, many perpetrators of political violence rationalize their acts by denying the basic humanity of those with whom they disagree. They are willing to face the death penalty or life in prison in an attempt to force everyone to conform to their views.

Keep ReadingShow less
A woman sitting down and speaking with a group of people.

The SVL (Stories, Values, Listen) framework—which aims to bridge political divides with simple, memorable steps for productive cross-partisan conversations—is an easy-to-use tool for making an impact at scale.

Getty Images, Luis Alvarez

Make Talking Politics Easier and More Scalable: Be SVL (Stories, Values, Listen)

How can one have a productive conversation across the political spectrum?

We offer simple, memorable guidance: Be SVL (pronounced like “civil”). SVL stands for sharing Stories, relating to a conversation partner’s Values, and closely Listening.

Keep ReadingShow less
St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

People attend a mass and ceremony for a new mural dedicated to New York City’s immigrant communities and honoring the city’s first responders at St. Patrick’s Cathedral on September 21, 2025 in New York City.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

In a bold fusion of sacred tradition and contemporary relevance, artist Adam Cvijanovic has unveiled a sweeping new mural at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City—one that reimagines the historic narthex as a vibrant ode to peace, migration, and spiritual continuity.

In an age of polarization and performative politics, it’s rare to find a work of art that speaks with both spiritual clarity and civic urgency. Yet that’s exactly what “What’s So Funny About Peace, Love and Understanding” accomplishes. The piece is more than a visual upgrade to a “dreary” entranceway—it’s a theological and cultural intervention, one that invites every visitor to confront the moral stakes of our immigration discourse.

Keep ReadingShow less