Book Review: Woke Antisemitism by David Bernstein

Antisemitism, often dubbed “the world’s oldest hatred,” has shown a terrifying ability to adapt to new cultural and political climates. Whether through medieval church decrees, 20th-century fascism, or radical Islamist rhetoric, antisemitism finds expression in whichever language the culture speaks. In the 21st century, particularly in elite Western institutions and academic circles, that language is now “woke.” And in Woke Antisemitism: How a Progressive Ideology Harms Jews, David L. Bernstein—formerly a leading figure in liberal Jewish advocacy—blows the whistle on what he sees as the ideological capture of his former allies.

Bernstein does not write from the political right, nor from religious conservatism. He identifies as a liberal-minded Jew committed to dialogue and pluralism. Yet his encounters with cancel culture, radical progressivism, and critical theory on issues relating to Zionism and Jewish identity led to a personal and professional crisis. He realized that the very ideological system he once supported was now turning its fire on Jews—not through slurs and swastikas, but through frameworks, metrics, and “anti-oppression” paradigms.

In this essay, we will expand upon the main arguments of Bernstein’s book by:

Taking deep dives into real-world case studies (e.g., May 2021 Gaza conflict and campus activism).
Highlighting key personal anecdotes from the author’s experience in Jewish leadership.
Quoting and analyzing Bernstein’s own words to draw out key themes.
Exploring antisemitism-identification frameworks like the Three D’s Test, IHRA Definition, and Livingstone Formulation.
Contrasting progressive justice ideology with biblical categories of justice.
Providing rich historical and cultural context, including the Jewish experience in America and on the political left.

This approach aims to serve both as a deep summary of Woke Antisemitism and a broader apologetic for vigilance against antisemitism in any form—especially when it masquerades as virtue.

The Progressive Trap — When the Allies Turn Hostile

What Is “Woke Antisemitism”?

Bernstein defines “woke antisemitism” as antisemitism rooted not in traditional bigotry or racial hatred, but in a new ideological structure that divides the world into binary categories of oppressor and oppressed. Under this lens, Jews—particularly white or Ashkenazi Jews, and especially Zionists—are often lumped into the “oppressor” category. This distorts Jewish identity, erases Jewish suffering, and renders any defense of Jewish interests as morally suspect.

Quoting Bernstein:

“The woke framework gives people a moral license to be antisemitic. It doesn’t sound like hate—because it’s cloaked in the language of justice.”

This new iteration of antisemitism is more insidious than classic forms. It does not rely on tropes about blood libel¹ or world domination. Instead, it views Israel as a “colonial settler state,” Zionism as racist, and Jews as part of the dominant white hegemony. And it does this with the blessing of institutional leaders who believe they are championing justice.

Personal Anecdote: The Turning Point

One of the most poignant episodes in Bernstein’s book is his realization—during a DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) meeting—that Jewish perspectives were no longer welcome in social justice discourse unless they parroted the anti-Israel, anti-Western party line.

When I suggested that antisemitism should be included in the DEI conversation, I was met with uncomfortable silence. One DEI officer even said, ‘But Jews are white.’

This moment crystallized for Bernstein what many Jews on the left are starting to realize: that their historic alliances with progressive movements are no longer tenable if those movements now see them as part of the problem.

Jews in the Progressive Movement: From Inclusion to Exclusion

Historically, Jews have been overrepresented in progressive activism. From the civil rights movement of the 1960s to labor organizing and refugee advocacy, Jewish Americans—motivated by both historical trauma and ethical tradition—embraced the cause of justice.

But the terrain has shifted. The same progressive spaces that once welcomed Jews are now deeply influenced by critical theory, which views race, gender, and sexuality as the only legitimate axes of oppression. This ideology tends to view Jews as a privileged group, especially if they are Zionist. Bernstein notes:

In the woke worldview, Jews are the wrong kind of minority.

Ironically, this flips the very logic that once united Jews and progressives. Victimhood has been politicized, and Jews have been removed from the category of victims—despite centuries of persecution.

From Case Study to Crisis — The Reality of Woke Antisemitism

Case Study 1: May 2021 Gaza Conflict and Progressive Silence

The May 2021 Israel–Hamas conflict served as a major flashpoint, exposing just how deeply antisemitic attitudes had penetrated supposedly progressive spaces. When Hamas launched thousands of rockets at Israeli civilian centers, Israel retaliated with precision strikes aimed at stopping terrorist infrastructure. The global reaction, however—particularly in Western progressive circles—was not one of nuance or context, but of moral condemnation exclusively aimed at Israel.

On social media, in universities, and even in corporate statements, the pattern was clear:

Israel was the aggressor.
Palestinians were the oppressed.
Zionism was framed as white colonialism.

Bernstein recounts how Jewish professionals felt forced into silence, fearing reputational harm or professional retaliation if they defended Israel or even expressed grief over Jewish casualties:

Jewish professionals reached out to me in tears. They were afraid to speak, afraid to be labeled oppressors. Some were being bullied on social media for simply saying ‘I stand with Israel.’

Major cultural institutions, including arts organizations, university departments, and activist nonprofits, issued one-sided statements condemning Israel. Jewish staff members often reported being excluded from conversations or pressured to renounce Zionism to prove their allyship.

Bernstein illustrates this as a moment of collective disillusionment:

It was the first time many liberal Jews realized they could be canceled, too—not despite their Jewishness, but because of it.

Case Study 2: Campus Antisemitism and the BDS Movement

Another battleground Bernstein highlights is higher education. College campuses, especially elite ones, have become breeding grounds for anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment under the guise of intersectional justice. The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement claims to be nonviolent and justice-oriented, but its true aims are radical and destructive.

Bernstein explains that BDS:

Denies Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
Paints all Zionists as racists or fascists.
Justifies antisemitism by hiding behind anti-Zionism.

Many Jewish students report:

Being excluded from progressive groups unless they disavow Israel.
Facing physical and verbal threats for displaying Israeli symbols.
Experiencing curriculum that frames Israel as evil and Judaism as complicit in oppression.

On some campuses, Jewish students are now the only minority whose identity is considered optional—or even toxic.

Bernstein also recounts how university administrators often refuse to act when antisemitic incidents occur, especially if they come from groups protected by progressive orthodoxy.

Case Study 3: DEI Programming and the Erasure of Jewish Identity

One of the most disturbing trends Bernstein explores is how DEI programs—intended to foster inclusion—often exclude Jews or frame them as privileged whites. He explains:

Jews are often absent from DEI training materials. When they are mentioned, it’s usually in the context of ‘privileged groups.’

This erases:

The trauma of the Holocaust.
Centuries of antisemitic persecution.
The modern reality of Jews being the most targeted religious group for hate crimes in the U.S.

Worse, when Jews try to raise these issues, they’re often accused of “centering themselves” or “deflecting from Palestinian voices.”

Bernstein warns that DEI ideology, when rooted in simplistic oppressor/oppressed binaries, creates environments where antisemitism flourishes—so long as it’s cloaked in progressive language.

Historical Background: Jews and the American Left

To understand why this shift is so disorienting for many American Jews, Bernstein gives historical context:

In the early 20th century, Jewish immigrants overwhelmingly aligned with labor unions, the Democratic Party, and civil rights coalitions.
Jews marched with Martin Luther King Jr., staffed legal aid clinics, founded civil liberties organizations, and championed minority rights.

Bernstein reflects:

For generations, Jews saw themselves as natural allies of the left—advocates for the marginalized, defenders of liberal democracy.

But in the post-2010s landscape, as progressive ideology adopted more Marxist and postcolonial frameworks, Jews were redefined not by their suffering but by their perceived power.

Thus, Jews went from:

“Oppressed minority” → “Privileged class.”
“Ethnoreligious survivors” → “White colonialists.”

This inversion is both historically illiterate and morally bankrupt, yet it now dominates much of academia and activism.

Naming the Beast — Frameworks for Identifying Modern Antisemitism

In an ideological culture where language is weaponized and oppression is redefined, clarity is essential. Bernstein devotes key chapters to equipping readers with intellectual tools for identifying antisemitism—especially in its modern, coded, or progressive forms. He relies heavily on three central concepts:

The Three D’s Test of Antisemitism
The IHRA Working Definition
The Livingstone Formulation

The Three D’s Test (Sharansky Framework)

Originally developed by Natan Sharansky, a Soviet refusenik and Israeli politician, the Three D’s test is designed to distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from antisemitism. Bernstein finds this framework particularly useful in the woke context, where antisemitism hides behind language of “human rights” and “anti-colonialism.”

The Three D’s:

Demonization – Criticism that portrays Israel or Zionism as evil in essence, rather than merely flawed. “When Israel is described as a ‘genocidal apartheid state’ without reference to Hamas terrorism or regional complexity, that is not legitimate criticism—it is demonization.”
Double Standards – Criticizing Israel more harshly than any other nation under similar circumstances. “Why is the only Jewish state in the world held to higher standards than any other democracy—or even totalitarian regime? That’s not activism. That’s bias.”
Delegitimization – Denying Israel’s right to exist at all, often calling Zionism inherently racist. “No other people are denied their right to national self-determination. Only Jews. That’s not equality—it’s erasure.”

Bernstein notes that woke ideology routinely fails all three of these tests—often in the same breath.

The IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, adopted by dozens of countries and institutions, offers a broad yet clear framework for identifying antisemitism. It includes illustrative examples, several of which deal with how anti-Zionism becomes antisemitic when it:

Denies Jews the right to self-determination.
Applies double standards not expected of other nations.
Uses symbols or images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., blood libels) to describe Israel.

Bernstein strongly supports the IHRA definition, calling it “a necessary firewall against rhetorical trickery.” He explains how woke activists often attempt to discredit the IHRA by claiming it “chills free speech” or “shields Israel from criticism.”

The IHRA does not prohibit criticism of Israel. It prohibits antisemitism masquerading as criticism.

He also notes a chilling pattern: progressive institutions that resist adopting the IHRA definition are often the same ones that excuse or ignore left-wing antisemitism.

The Livingstone Formulation: A Tool for Silencing Jews

Coined by British academic David Hirsh, the Livingstone Formulation refers to a tactic where someone accused of antisemitism claims that the accusation itself is an attempt to silence criticism of Israel.

Bernstein sees this deflection tactic as one of the most potent tools in the woke antisemitic arsenal:

When Jews speak out about antisemitism, we’re told we’re weaponizing it. That our goal isn’t safety—but silencing. It’s classic gaslighting.

Examples include:

Accusing Jewish students of “crying antisemitism” to suppress Palestinian voices.
Claiming that antisemitism accusations are merely tools of “Zionist influence.”
Dismissing concerns about antisemitic curricula as attempts to “control the narrative.”

The result? Jewish voices are delegitimized—not because their claims are false, but because they’re seen as ideologically inconvenient.

Why These Frameworks Matter

In a postmodern age where truth is deconstructed and lived experience becomes the arbiter of justice, clear standards for identifying antisemitism are vital. Bernstein argues that if Jews fail to advocate for definitional clarity, woke antisemitism will continue to grow unchecked:

You can’t fight what you won’t name. And woke culture has mastered the art of renaming antisemitism as justice.

The Three D’s, IHRA, and Livingstone Formulation give Jews and their allies language to fight back—but only if they are willing to use it boldly and unapologetically.

Personal Story: Speaking Out and Being Smeared

In one of the most gripping parts of the book, Bernstein recounts being called a “Zionist fascist” by fellow activists after he publicly defended the IHRA definition in a progressive Jewish forum.

They told me I was centering Jewish trauma to deflect from Palestinian suffering. They said I had internalized whiteness. And these were my friends.

This moment was a turning point. He realized the problem wasn’t just misinformation—it was ideological blindness fueled by a worldview that sees Jews not as individuals, but as symbols of systemic power.

Justice Hijacked — Biblical vs Ideological Justice

Woke ideology presents itself as the moral high ground in today’s political discourse. It claims to fight for justice, protect the marginalized, and dismantle oppressive systems. Yet, as Bernstein’s work reveals, this ideology often replaces true justice with ideological rigidity, resentment, and scapegoating—especially when it comes to Jews and Israel.

In this section, we’ll assess:

What ideological justice looks like in woke culture.
What biblical justice demands from individuals and societies.
Why the woke distortion of justice inevitably enables antisemitism.

Ideological Justice: A Neo-Marxist Moral Framework

Bernstein implicitly critiques the woke ideology’s view of justice, which is rooted in the following presuppositions:

Human identity is primarily social: People are defined by group membership (race, gender, sexuality).
Morality is power analysis: Justice means reversing perceived power imbalances between oppressors and oppressed.
Truth is subjective and narrative-based: Lived experience replaces objective standards.
History is a morality tale: The West, whiteness, and capitalism are cast as the villains; victims of these systems are morally superior.

As Bernstein explains:

Woke ideology offers a binary moral universe. It demands not discernment, but allegiance. Not analysis, but submission. Not truth, but solidarity with the approved victim groups.

In this framework:

Jews are oppressors because they are perceived as wealthy, white, or pro-Israel.
Palestinians are oppressed and thus morally superior, regardless of actions or ideologies.
Zionism becomes irredeemable because it is an “oppressor project,” despite being a movement for Jewish survival.

This is not justice in any meaningful sense. It is a moral caste system that divides the world into saints and sinners based on group identity.

Biblical Justice: Rooted in Truth, Mercy, and Moral Clarity

Contrast this with the biblical worldview, which defines justice as:

Rooted in God’s character (Deut. 32:4): “The Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are justice.”
Impartial (Ex. 23:3; Lev. 19:15): “You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.”
Personal responsibility (Ezek. 18): Sin and righteousness are individual, not group-determined.
Mercy without deception (Mic. 6:8): “To do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.”

Biblical justice:

Cares for the oppressed—but does not falsely assign guilt to entire groups.
Exposes evil—but demands due process, truth, and repentance.
Demands humility and accountability—not ideological certainty or self-righteousness.

Scapegoating vs Sin-Bearing

A key theological contrast emerges here: woke ideology creates scapegoats to maintain its moral narrative, while biblical Christianity offers a sin-bearer in Jesus Christ.

Woke antisemitism needs a villain to explain suffering: Zionists, Jews, Israel.
Biblical theology points to the universality of sin and the sufficiency of the cross.

Bernstein doesn’t write as a Christian, but his descriptions resonate with Christian theology:

In the woke system, someone must be blamed. The moral economy demands a sacrifice. Often, it’s the Jew.

This parallels René Girard’s scapegoat theory and ultimately finds its resolution in the Gospel, which says justice is satisfied not through condemnation of the innocent, but by substitutionary atonement.

The Injustice of False Equivalence

One of the most egregious misapplications of ideological justice is the equating of Zionism with racism, or Israel with apartheid South Africa. Bernstein rebukes these comparisons as slanderous and ahistorical:

To equate a thriving, multiethnic democracy that grants rights to minorities with a white supremacist regime is not justice—it’s propaganda.

From a biblical standpoint, slander is injustice (Prov. 19:5), and partiality in judgment is forbidden (James 2:1–9). Yet woke ideology often thrives on selective outrage, double standards, and inflammatory narratives.

The Jewish Ethical Tradition and Justice

Bernstein, as a Jew, draws from the ethical tradition of his people, which has long taught:

Tzedek, tzedek tirdof—“Justice, justice you shall pursue” (Deut. 16:20).
Justice must be rooted in truth, not ideology.
Even when opposing real injustices, you may not bear false witness or destroy the innocent.

Bernstein’s critique of woke justice is deeply aligned with this ethic. He calls his readers back to discernment, nuance, and accountability.

Conclusion: Justice Without Truth Is Tyranny

Ultimately, Bernstein’s warning is not merely political—it is moral. Woke ideology has become a replacement religion, complete with heresies, blasphemies, and atonements. And in its moral economy, Jews—especially if they are pro-Israel—are treated as sinners in need of cancellation.

Wokeness offers no forgiveness, no redemption, no nuance. Only compliance. If you dissent, you’re an oppressor. If you defend Israel, you’re a fascist. If you object to antisemitism, you’re silencing others.

By contrasting this with both Jewish and Christian traditions of justice, we can see how urgent it is to reclaim justice from its ideological distortions.

Old Hatreds in New Robes — Historical and Cultural Roots of Left-Wing Antisemitism

Antisemitism has been called a “shape-shifter.” It takes different forms depending on the dominant ideas of the age. In the medieval period, it was religious. In the 19th and 20th centuries, it was racial. In the 21st century—especially in progressive circles—it has become ideological. In this section, we trace how antisemitism, long associated with the political right, has migrated and mutated into left-wing movements.

David L. Bernstein contends that the Jewish community’s failure to recognize this shift has left it vulnerable and unprepared.

The Enlightenment and the Birth of Modern Antisemitism

The Enlightenment offered emancipation for Jews in Western Europe, but it came with strings: Jews were expected to assimilate and shed their religious distinctives.
Thinkers like Voltaire and Kant—celebrated as rationalists—often despised Judaism, seeing it as primitive and tribal.

Lesson: The left-wing suspicion of Jewish particularism has deep philosophical roots. When Jews assert a distinct national identity (e.g., Zionism), they are again viewed with suspicion—as if tribalism threatens universal progress.

Socialism, Marxism, and the “Jewish Question”

Despite Karl Marx being ethnically Jewish, his treatment of Jews was often hostile. In On the Jewish Question (1843), Marx equated Judaism with capitalism and greed, writing:

What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly god? Money.

This sentiment took root in European socialist and communist movements, where Jews were often scapegoated for:

Capitalism (as bankers)
Zionism (as nationalists)
Religious identity (as “superstitious”)

This created a paradox: Jews were criticized as both rootless cosmopolitans and tribal nationalists, depending on what best served the revolution’s narrative.

Bernstein warns that these tropes have not disappeared—they’ve just been repackaged in woke language.

In today’s woke worldview, Jews are still the greedy bankers, the global manipulators, the privileged elites—just expressed through the lens of white privilege, settler colonialism, and systemic power.

1960s Radicalism and the Rise of Anti-Zionism

The 1967 Six-Day War, in which Israel decisively defeated its Arab enemies, marked a turning point. Until then, Israel had enjoyed wide bipartisan support in the West. But after its victory:

The Soviet Union labeled Zionism as racism.
The New Left adopted anti-Zionist rhetoric as part of its anti-colonial framework.
Palestinian revolutionary groups were embraced as freedom fighters.

Radical leftists began equating Israel with apartheid South Africa or U.S. imperialism. Jews who supported Israel were now “reactionaries,” even “fascists.”

Bernstein sees today’s campus culture as a direct descendant of that ideological moment.

The language of anti-Zionism today—‘decolonization,’ ‘settler state,’ ‘apartheid’—comes straight out of the radical manuals of the 1970s. It just wears a hoodie and tweets instead of handing out leaflets.

The Shift in the American Jewish Left

For most of the 20th century, American Jews leaned heavily leftward politically. They helped build the ACLU, NAACP, labor unions, and civil rights coalitions. However, as the New Left turned toward identity-based activism, many Jews began to find themselves out of place.

Why?

Jews were seen as too white, too successful, or too Western.
Zionism was increasingly vilified by the activists they once marched with.
Progressive spaces became ideologically rigid, with litmus tests that many Jews could not pass without renouncing core aspects of their identity.

Bernstein experienced this firsthand, particularly in DEI contexts and activist coalitions:

To be fully accepted in progressive spaces today, a Jew must often disown Zionism, overlook antisemitism, and embrace ideological talking points that erase their history.

Warnings from Within: Jewish Thinkers Who Saw It Coming

Bernstein is not the first Jewish intellectual to ring the alarm. Others, too, have warned that:

Wokeness is hostile to Jewish continuity.
Intersectionality excludes Jews unless they deny their history.
Antisemitism is thriving on the left—even as many Jews remain blind to it.

Notable voices include:

Bari Weiss, former New York Times columnist, who left the paper after being harassed for her Jewish identity and Zionist views.
Jonathan Haidt, who has criticized ideological conformity on campuses and its effect on open discourse—including Jewish voices.
Deborah Lipstadt, who has defended the IHRA definition and called out antisemitism on both the right and left.

Bernstein aligns with these figures but adds his own powerful perspective: a former insider who watched his progressive allies become enemies—not with hatred, but with ideological conviction.

What Must Be Done — Resistance, Reform, and the Road Ahead

David L. Bernstein’s Woke Antisemitism is more than a memoir or a polemic—it is a warning. A survivor of ideological capture within his own movement, Bernstein emerges not embittered, but emboldened. He calls readers, especially Jews and their allies, to face reality: woke ideology is not just misguided—it is dangerous, especially for those who refuse to fit neatly into its categories of victim and oppressor.

In this final section, we draw together the major lessons of the book and offer a path forward.

Woke Antisemitism Is Not an Aberration—It Is a Feature

Bernstein’s central insight is that antisemitism under woke ideology is not a bug, but a feature of the system. Because wokeism defines justice in terms of power and identity, it must always create villains. And Jews—by virtue of perceived whiteness, economic success, and commitment to Israel—have become convenient scapegoats.

To sustain its moral narrative, woke ideology needs a perpetual oppressor. In many movements today, the Jew has once again been cast in that role.

This reimagined antisemitism is all the more dangerous because it feels like justice to its adherents. It hides behind noble slogans, institutional language, and intersectional moralism.

The Price of Silence: Institutional Cowardice and Jewish Complicity

One of Bernstein’s most biting critiques is aimed not at the ideological left—but at Jewish institutions that have kowtowed to it. He recounts multiple stories of Jewish leaders who:

Refused to defend the IHRA definition.
Declined to speak out during antisemitic protests.
Silenced staff members who supported Israel.
Rejected DEI reform proposals that included Jewish identity.

Too many Jewish leaders want to be liked more than they want to be faithful. But appeasement never protects us. It only emboldens our enemies.

This is a call to courage. The Jewish community must stop chasing institutional approval and instead become bold defenders of truth, even at the cost of social capital.

Practical Strategies for Resistance

Bernstein ends his book—and we end this essay—with practical steps that individuals, communities, and institutions can take.

1. Educate the Next Generation

Teach Jewish students about ideological antisemitism.
Equip them with tools like the Three D’s, the IHRA definition, and historical context.
Encourage critical thinking, not ideological submission.

2. Reform DEI Structures

Demand the inclusion of Jews in DEI programming.
Expose the antisemitic biases embedded in current training models.
Develop alternative justice models rooted in impartiality and truth.

3. Speak Without Fear

Normalize public Jewish voices defending Israel and Jewish identity.
Refuse to be shamed into silence by accusations of “privilege” or “white adjacency.”
Build alliances with other groups who reject ideological totalitarianism.

4. Reclaim Language

Reject false definitions of oppression and justice.
Clarify what antisemitism is—and isn’t—using precise, principled language.
Use moral clarity, not slogans, to confront injustice.

5. Build Moral Coalitions

Partner with Christians, Muslims, atheists, and others who value truth over ideology.
Find common cause in opposing scapegoating, identity tribalism, and ideological tyranny.

Theological Reflections: A Call to Truth and Courage

While Bernstein writes as a secular Jew, his moral vision resonates strongly with a biblical worldview. Christians reading his work should recognize the stakes—not just for Jews, but for all people of faith and conscience.

Truth is not tribal. It must be defended even when it is unpopular.
Justice must be rooted in God’s character, not ideological systems.
Scapegoating is satanic. It mimics the Accuser who blames without atonement.
Courage is a Christian virtue. Believers must speak for truth, even if it costs them their place in the public square.

Woke antisemitism is not just a Jewish problem. It is a civilizational problem, striking at the heart of Western moral order, rational discourse, and religious liberty.

Conclusion: The Fire Next Time

Bernstein ends his work with both warning and hope. Antisemitism is growing—not only in fringe corners but in the halls of power, the lecture halls of universities, and the curricula of public schools. But it can be resisted. Not with panic or hatred—but with clarity, courage, and truth.

We must stop apologizing for our identity, stop retreating from our history, and stop negotiating with those who will not negotiate with us. The hour is late—but not too late.

This is not merely about Jews. It is about the future of freedom, of justice, and of what kind of civilization we will pass on to our children.

S.D.G.,

Robert Sparkman

MMXXV

christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com

¹ Blood libel is a false and antisemitic accusation that Jews murder non-Jewish children—especially Christians—to use their blood in religious rituals, such as baking Passover matzah. This myth dates back to the Middle Ages and has been used to justify persecution, violence, and even massacres of Jewish communities. It has no basis in Jewish teaching or practice and is one of the most enduring and dangerous forms of antisemitic propaganda.

RELATED CONTENT

Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.

If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain coarse language or some opinions I don’t agree with.

Realize that I sometimes use phrases like “trans man”, “trans woman”, “transgender” , “transition” or similar language for ease of communication. Obviously, as a conservative Christian, I don’t believe anyone has ever become the opposite sex. Unfortunately, we are forced to adopt the language of the left to discuss some topics without engaging in lengthy qualifying statements that make conversations awkward.

Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.

Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots. You can always send me an email at christiannewsjunkie@gmail.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.

I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.