On my afternoon walk, I noticed that a homeowner had recently placed a sign in their front lawn, reading simply: “I stand with Israel.”

Four hundred or so days ago, I would have thought nothing of it. Back then, supporters of Israel still reeling from the shock of the October 7th attack felt a need to express themselves.

But it’s not December 2023. It’s 14 months into this nightmare. Such a decision now raises a troubling question—exactly what, in the current context, does “stand with Israel” mean?

In the past week, US media have featured well-researched reports on Israel’s efforts to secure their hold on Gaza through: mass demolitions of homes, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure; forced transfer of the remaining Palestinians in the north of Gaza; Israeli snipers making a “sport” of killing fleeing Palestinians and keeping score of their “hits”; and construction of military occupation bases in the far north of Gaza and the Nezarim corridor, including a “resort-like” facility where war-weary troops can rest and relax.

Stories have also appeared on the continuing lack of medical services, food, water, sanitation, and shelter for the two million Palestinians crammed into Gaza’s south.

Added to this are developments in Israel. After a long hiatus, protests against Netanyahu’s government have continued—objections to his callous disregard for and manipulation of the fate of the remaining Israeli hostages and protests of his ongoing effort to escape prosecution for corruption.

Some courageous Israeli journalists and commentators are challenging their fellow citizens to see what’s been ignored for over a year: namely, that genocide is being committed in their name.

One example by the brilliant commentator B. Michael in the Israeli daily Haaretz walks readers through the legal definition of “genocide.” Noting that the convention against this crime lists five actions, any of which is sufficient to consider a state or people perpetrators of genocide, Michael demonstrates that Israel is guilty of four of the five.

He concludes, “Feigning innocence isn't admissible as a defense.” Nor will claiming that it was done “in good faith, or purely for reasons of self-defense.”

And so, at this point, what exactly does “stand with Israel” mean?

That said, those who recently posted this yard sign have the right to express their views, however insensitive or repugnant others might feel them to be. Defacing their sign or inciting violence in response is clearly wrong. Believing in democracy and the need for civil discourse requires rejection of insults, threats, or vandalism.

But this raises another question: What reaction would result from a neighbor placing a “I stand with Palestine” sign on their lawn?

Without a doubt, public opinion on Israel/Palestine has dramatically shifted in recent years, with greater sympathy than ever before for Palestinians and increasing rejection of Israel’s policies, even among its supporters.

Recognizing this sea-change, pro-Israel groups and their allies in government and parts of the media have gone on the offensive to silence pro-Palestinian sentiment and even ban legitimate expressions of support for Palestinians and opposition to Israeli policies violating international and US law. These efforts to stifle pro-Palestinian speech still appear to have the upper hand.

A review of reactions to recent events on campuses and debates in Congress and state legislatures makes clear that a simple “I stand with Palestine” sign could be denounced as inflammatory, insensitive, and even antisemitic.

We must acknowledge that speech on both sides has in some instances veered in unacceptable directions. Pro-Israel demonstrators taunting Palestinians with “We will rape you,” or pro-Palestinians chanting “Zionists don’t deserve to live” must be condemned.

But what’s worrisome are the all-too-frequent reports that relatively benign expressions of support for Palestinian rights are censored for making supporters of Israel “uncomfortable.” This kind of dangerous overreach is precisely what’s happening.

The bottom line is that if someone wants to declare that they “stand with Israel” they should be free to do so, and accept that, given what’s unfolding in Palestine, it will cause some to ask: “What exactly do you mean by that?”

And their neighbors should be able to declare that they “stand with Palestine,” to answer questions they may be asked, and to do so without fear of retribution.

Sadly, we’re not there yet.