Radical Islam is not the only enemy that needs to be named.
Readers of this page know that we believe it is indispensable to name radical Islam in order to defeat it. We shall not rehash the arguments, shared by many conservatives. Nor shall we rehash the other side, championed by President Obama.
We do believe that on the enemy-naming fulcrum, consistency is a virtue. President Obama believes in naming another enemy: guns. We wish he were consistent and named radical Islam, too. Conservatives believe in naming radical Islam. We wish they were consistent and named guns, too.
Guns are not the only cause of mass shootings, but then again, radical Islam is not the only cause of terrorism. Guns are protected under the Second Amendment, but then again Islam is protected under the First Amendment. Our point: It is not necessary to oversimplify in identifying causation in order to name it. By far, the predominant cause of terrorism is radical Islam. Name it. By far, the predominant cause of mass shootings in this country is the gun. Name it.
Liberals will not name radical Islam but are incensed that conservatives will not name the gun. Conservative will not name the gun but are incensed that liberals will not name radical Islam.
Do you detect a blind spot, duly inverse on each side, rather than a cogent argument on both sides? We do. An enemy is an enemy. It is non-partisan. It is whoever it chooses to be. It, the Second Amendment and the First Amendment notwithstanding, is an enemy. Name it. Don’t flinch. Defeat it. Be done with it. Turn society around.
Instead of the fruitless, endless, theoretical, fear-laden discussions as to whether we should name the enemy — name it. That would be bracing. It would go a long way to defeating it — without detracting from anyone’s Constitutional rights. We could breathe easier at night.
Copyright © 2016 by the Intermountain Jewish News