Attorney- J.D. Law, 2003-2006
Associate at Hall, Booth, Smith, & Slover, P.C.
Delegate for the Democratic National Convention
Writer, Christianity Today, The Gospel Coalition, The Hill
Co-Chair, Barack Obama’s Gen44-Atlanta Initiative
Co-Founder, The AND Campaign
President, The AND Campaign
Justin Giboney is a Democrat political activist and attorney who advocates the unbiblical position that Christians should embrace social justice ideology. Alongside Michael Wear and Sho Baraka (other Leftist activists), Giboney co-founded the AND Campaign to that end. He advocates for conservative acceptance of the critical race theory tenet of “racial justice.” While he remains politically active, Giboney has discouraged conservative Christians from being “too involved in politics,” as he believes this is worshipping “lesser gods.”
Giboney’s AND Campaign:
The AND Campaign’s logo on the website’s front page used to read “Biblical Values & Social Justice,” though now it says “Compassion & Conviction” as a reflection of the book that Giboney co-authored alongside Michael Wear and Chris Butler. Their mission statement is “To educate and organize Christians for civic and cultural engagement that results in better representation, more just and compassionate policies and a healthier political culture.” While the mission statement does not in and of itself seem Woke at first glance, further investigation into Giboney’s political outlook (alongside our article on Michael Wear) reveals that it is, indeed, a Woke organization designed to degrade Biblical ethics for the sake of garnering votes for Democrat candidates and for the sake of pushing liberal policies.
“Certified Obama Apologist”:
In an article posted to Christianity Today on May 26, 2016, entitled “How Urban Christians Failed President Obama,” Justin Giboney made a statement regarding Barack Obama and some of his policies. On the one hand, Barack Obama had clearly crossed a line that even (most) liberal “Christians” were not yet ready to cross: transgender bathroom access in all public schools in the United States. Recognizing the major gap between Obama’s radical, aggressive Leftist push for transgenderist ideology and the Overton Window of 2016 (which had not yet fully shifted into full-on pro-transgenderism in most evangelical churches), Giboney took to Christianity Today to both criticize the then-President’s decision regarding the bathroom issue (in all likelihood for the sake of Giboney’s own credibility rather than because Giboney holds any Biblical position on the issue), and at the same time to cultivate a positive image of Obama that would endure criticism.
In the article, Giboney proclaims that he was “compelled by the historic nature of President Obama’s election.” Additionally, he admits: “As a certified Obama apologist, I still smile in the glory of this collective prize…” The collective prize is, of course, having a black president of the United States, as if race is of paramount importance when considering for whom one should vote. Barack Obama’s pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, pro-critical race theory, and pro-transgenderist positions are more than enough to have disqualified him from any form of leadership, governmental or otherwise. The fact that Giboney admitted his admiration for Obama serves as a testament to his true political underpinnings and subversion of Christianity. The AND Campaign, then, has served as Giboney’s vehicle for forwarding Leftism and pro-Democrat, Obama-esque political philosophy in the realm of the Church.
Giboney’s Third Way:
Justin Giboney emphasizes the idea that Christians should not be exclusively conservative. This serves as a foundation for a narrative of moral acceptance for Christians voting Democratic, while simultaneously drawing a caricature that makes conservatism out to be morally equivalent to progressivism. For example, on June 8th of 2020, Giboney tweeted the following:
1. “Being conservative or progressive on every single issue is intellectually lazy & unfaithful. Critique and push back on these flawed ideologies.”
Here, Giboney is suggesting that someone who possesses intellectual rigor should embrace elements of both conservatism and progressivism. He couches his language in negative terms, but it is a logical inference to conclude that he wants conservative Christians to be more willing to accept points of Leftist ideology.
2. “Make conservatism sympathize and pursue racial justice.”
Here, Giboney implies that conservatism is not “just” regarding the issue of race, and that conservatives are therefore unsympathetic. This is founded on a critical race theorist definition of “justice,” which implies that legal, cultural, and other social institutions are still under the weight of racism, and that they operate under a racist hierarchy that disadvantages minorities (especially black people). Given that minorities are generally prioritized for hiring, for public speaking events, and that they are even prioritized in a number of modern court cases wherein black individuals are deliberately being given lighter sentences for crimes, the idea that Western institutions are racist against minorities is factually incorrect. Giboney’s support of this idea fuels his desire to see conservatism changed into a paradigm that accepts some of the underlying principles of critical race theory, which is what he is expressing in this Tweet.
3. “Make progressivism acknowledge absolute truth & the sanctity of life. #AND2020.”
Here, Giboney attempts to balance out his criticism of conservatism with a criticism of progressivism. This serves as a foil, which makes the rest of what he said more palatable to those readers and followers who are more inclined towards a conservative worldview. These points– that absolute truth exists and that life is sacred– comprise a low bar that hardly dents the surface of the evils inherent within Leftist ideology.
Similarly, on January 28th, 2022, the AND Campaign’s Twitter account (presided over by Justin Giboney) posted the following, which Giboney then retweeted:
Using N. T. Wright’s quotation as a purported justification for third way philosophy, the AND Campaign and Giboney attempt to soothe the consciences of those who wish to compromise on the Biblical worldview, which is uncompromisingly conservative.
Justin Giboney on Biden’s Election and Black Disparities:
“It was, in many ways, black Christians who brought this administration in, and both our President and our Vice President, I think, have a lot of potential. I think they can do a lot of good things, but they’ve done things in the past that aren’t necessarily helpful to the Church either. I mean, if you go back and look at some of the judiciary committee hearings, and how Kamala Harris talked to Christians who were trying to be judges, and what she said about their Christian convictions is not something that any of us should be happy about. So, we just have to be vigilant about that. You know, we should push them to take care of what I’m calling these ‘disparity issues.’ These are the issues that most black people were caring about. We’re talking about disparities in healthcare. We’re talking about disparities in education and housing. These are the things that we want them to be focused on, of course, when they handle COVID and all that stuff. We didn’t put them in office to be just talking about some of these more kind of bourgeoisie progressive or elite progressive culture war issues. We didn’t put you in there to have, you know, no limits on abortion. We didn’t put you in there to do these sweeping changes when it comes to gender, and to make sure that biological men could play women’s sports and all these other things. That’s not what the people need.”
In other words, Giboney admits to having voted for Biden, and he justifies this with the underlying, unstated belief that all politicians are imperfect and that it is therefore justifiable to vote for a Democrat. He identifies Biden as having been put into office (at least, in large part) by black Americans, and that they put him into office for the express purpose of taking care of “disparity issues.” By disparity issues, Giboney means the notion that black people are unjustly discriminated against and therefore have worse healthcare, poorer education, and bad housing. He promotes the idea that black Americans should demand that Biden and Harris provide healthcare, education, and housing in ways that will eliminate statistical demographic disparities. He does not acknowledge that any of those disparities are primarily culturally/behaviorally caused; rather, he takes for granted the premise that black people are poor because the government is simply not doing enough to help them climb out of poverty.
Giboney’s Subtle Anathematization of Christians who Reject Social Justice Ideology:
On November 11, 2021, Giboney posted the following thread:
Given his third way position, Justin Giboney is comfortable criticizing conservatives for rejecting social justice ideology because he provides some relief in the form of light criticism against some Democratic points as a counterbalance. He writes that “Christians who deny the Bible demands a redemptive form of social justice are not orthodox,” revealing that he thinks consistent, conservative, Biblical Christianity is heretical. Of course, Biblical Christianity rejects social justice, which is “sold as something that it isn’t,” as accomplished researcher Trevor Loudon explained in the Enemies Within: The Church film. Social justice means the redistribution of wealth, privileges, status, and other goods to those who identify as minorities, away from those who have been identified as “privileged” by minorities who hold Leftist social and economic positions. It does not simply mean “justice in the social context.”
When he writes that “They’re more ideologically conservative than they are Biblical,” Giboney uses a tactic which seeks to separate ideological conservatism from Christianity. While there do exist a number of ideologies that pose as “conservative” that are not Biblical (e.g., neo-conservatism, libertarian conservatism, etc.), traditional conservatism is what Giboney attacks here, and that is Biblical. This is a thinly veiled insult against conservative Christians who understand that progressivism and social justice ideology are not Biblically sound, and that no Christian can be consistently Biblical while accepting the tenets of social justice.
Then, when Giboney says that “Disregarding justice in the social context is not a minor theological error,” he conflates terms. This is an example of Motte-and-Bailey fallacy, wherein a term is used to mean one specific thing in a claim, and then when that specific thing is challenged (or in anticipation of a challenge), the person who made the claim retreats into a safer definition that is not as radical as the definition he was using when he made the claim. In the first Tweet, Giboney speaks about social justice, which refers to the neo-Marxist goal of redistributing wealth, privileges, power, status, etc. to minorities by removing them from non-minorities. In the second Tweet, he attempts to deflect criticism by feigning belief in social justice as nothing more than “justice in the social context.” That is not what the term means; after all, if it were, then conservatism would embrace social justice, as conservatism seeks to promote Biblical justice in every area of life, including social areas. But conservatism does not embrace it precisely because it has lawless, neo-Marxist underpinnings.