An “Honor Killing” for the Democratic Party

Jonathan Feldstein

Honor Killings in the West. Screengrab via Youtube.

If the Democratic Party does not remove the growing shame of the rise of Islamists within it, it will become a victim of it. And so will we all.

There is a term associated with radical Islam that’s so disturbing and contradictory in every way that most decent people recoil from even hearing it: “honor killing.” The term is as paradoxical as the practice is evil.

It describes the murder of a woman by her own relatives who believe that she has brought shame upon her family by violating cultural or Islamic religious “values.”  It is a barbaric practice, utterly incompatible with human dignity, individual liberty, and the rule of law. At least 5000 and as many as 20,000 or more women worldwide are killed by their own relatives annually. This includes dozens in the United States where at least there are legal consequences.

Let me be absolutely clear: I oppose “honor killings” without reservation. I do not support, suggest, encourage, or endorse political or religious violence, murder, threats, or physical harm against anyone. Nothing in this article should be interpreted as a call for violence against anyone. It is a metaphor, albeit a frightful one. I abhor and reject such violence, or the implication that in any way I advocate for that.

But the Democratic Party is facing a crisis that demands a different kind of reckoning from within, an ideological one related to something that should be shameful within its own ranks, and which can only be corrected from within.

As an increasing number of candidates associated with Islamist political movements and ideologies are winning Democratic primaries and general elections, party leaders must ask themselves a question they have avoided for far too long:

How much extremism can a political party absorb before it no longer recognizes itself?

The Democratic Party does not need literal “honor killings.” It needs a forceful, peaceful, and democratic purging of ideas that have infiltrated, distorted, and tarnished a party that once proudly defined itself through civil rights, pluralism, religious freedom, and protection of minorities.

Some of the political and cultural movements and organizations influencing today’s Islamist activists (Moslem Brotherhood, Council on American-Islamic Relations – CAIR, the former Holy Land Foundation, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Association of Palestine, the Quranic Literacy Institute and others) come from societies and are part of radical ideologies where “honor-based violence” is tolerated, defended, or in fact thrives. The 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial put this in center stage. That reality should not be used to condemn entire populations or faith communities. But neither should it be erased or ignored when discussing the values that certain political leaders and pundits bring into American public life.

The United States is not merely a collection of communities living beside one another. It is a constitutional republic built upon shared principles: individual rights, equality before the law, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to disagree without fear of coercion or violence.

Those principles are threatened when extremist Islamist political leaders rationalize, celebrate, or participate in terrorism – like September 11, and other more recent incidents from New Orleans to Detroit to Fort Hood. They foment ongoing radicalization of individuals, especially youth, known as homegrown violent extremists (HVEs). They impose long-term pressure on social cohesion and free speech through advocating for Islamic Sharia law, promoting hostility toward Israel’s existence, or treat antisemitism, Jewish identity, and Zionism as equal and all uniquely illegitimate. These are just a few of the internal threats that face American society.

And yet too many Democratic leaders have responded with silence, euphemisms, or carefully crafted statements designed to avoid political discomfort and losing elections.

They have treated the rise of Islamic influenced antisemitism as a public-relations problem rather than a moral failure. They have confused legitimate concern about extremist ideology with prejudice against Moslems. They have allowed radical activists to define the boundaries of acceptable debate.

This is not compassion. It is cowardice. Islamists have hijacked public discourse and it’s becoming groupthink.

A political party cannot defend pluralism while tolerating people and movements that seek to impose ideological conformity on an entire country as is the Moslem Brotherhood’s century old agenda. It cannot claim to protect minorities while allowing Jews to be singled out and demonized. It cannot champion women’s rights while excusing cultural or political systems that deny women equality, or murder them because of some perception of shame in their family and culture. It cannot defend democracy while normalizing those who excuse political violence or reject constitutional principles when they become inconvenient.

The Democratic Party must decide whether it still believes in universal standards, or whether those standards now depend on the identity of the person committing the offense, or those who are the intended victims.

The ideological purge that is needed must be democratic and peaceful. It means party leaders refusing to endorse or normalize extremism. It means challenging antisemitism even when doing so is politically inconvenient, a statement and equation that never should even have to be made. It means demanding that candidates clearly reject terrorism, religious coercion, political violence, discrimination. It means rejecting those who attempt to silence competing views. It means doing so even at the risk of losing an election.

No one should be harmed. No one should be threatened. No one should be excluded because of race, ethnicity, or religion.

But dangerous ideas must be challenged and rooted out.

The Democratic Party should have the bravery and backbone to draw moral boundaries. It should reject support for Islamist terrorist organizations without qualification. It should defend religious freedom while opposing efforts to impose religious doctrine. It should say clearly that antisemitism is unacceptable, whether it comes from the political right or the political left. It should affirm that America’s constitutional values apply equally to everyone and must not be manipulated to allow the infiltration of the most dangerous ideologies that seek to undermine these values.

Political parties should be more than machines for winning elections. They should be institutions that help define the nation’s moral direction.

When leaders refuse to confront extremism, extremism does not remain at the margins. It moves toward the center. It gains legitimacy. It wins primaries. It enters legislatures, state houses and mayors’ offices. And eventually, those who once dismissed warnings as exaggerations discover that the political culture has changed around them and they are now victims of it.

The Democratic Party still has time to reclaim its principles.

But it will require courage, not violence. Accountability, not vengeance. Democratic action, not intimidation.

The party needs not literal honor killings. It needs an honorable reckoning: a decisive rejection of ideologies that promote misogyny, antisemitism, intolerance, extremism, and hostility toward the constitutional values that hold America together.

Dangerous ideas should be defeated through truth. Candidates adhering to these should be defeated at the ballot box. Extremism should be exposed through open debate and moral clarity.

That is the reckoning the Democratic Party needs. Failure to purge the shame that has infected the party – within their house – will make the Democratic Party and all of us victims of the ideology that is attacking from within.

And the time to begin is now.

Jonathan Feldstein is president of the Genesis 123 Foundation (www,genesis123.co) whose mission is to build bridges between Jews and Christians and Christians with Israel. He was born and educated in the U.S. and immigrated to Israel in 2004. He is married and the father of six, and grandfather of four (so far).

Two sons and a son in law are currently serving in the IDF and have been involved in combat in Gaza and Lebanon since the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre in Israel.

Jonathan is a leader working with and among Christian supporters of Israel, and shares experiences of living as an Orthodox Jew in Israel through his work, writing, and as host of the Inspiration from Zion podcast. Since the war began, he has authored more than 150 articles, and participated in a similar number of interviews, briefings, prayer events, and more.

Jonathan is working with Christian leaders all over the world to realize a true peace in Gaza, details of which can be found at www.SolutionforPeaceinGaza.com.

In 2023 he published the highly acclaimed book, Israel the Miracle (www.israelthemiracle.com), which makes a great gift for Chanukah and Christmas, and year round.