Severe Restriction – McManna.com

Imagine a bomb exploded in your hometown today. It was in a messenger bag that belonged to a person sitting in a popular restaurant in the heart of “restaurant row.” The bomber reached into the bag and detonated the device shortly after 12:00 noon, lunch time – the busiest time of day. Many people, including the bomber, died. Many others were wounded. Some seriously.

Severe Restriction

What likely conclusions can you draw about the bomber in this imagined event? Was the bomber tall or short? What was the bomber’s favorite color? Did the bomber like music, own a pet, have a favorite food? How about the bomber’s religion? Is it not easy, ridiculously easy, mind-numbingly easy, to identify—with almost complete confidence—that the bomber envisioned above was a follower of Islam?

In a few months time Americans will elect the 45th president of the United States. One candidate has called for severely restricting entry into the United States of people who follow the religion of Islam. Critics of severe restriction argue that Islamic terrorists are a small percentage of a much larger peaceful group. Critics argue it’s wrong to judge a peaceful majority by the actions of a violent minority. And critics are quick to point out that many religions have a history of violence. These arguments are delivered with demanding intensity; as if they are capable of alleviating the effects of Islamic terrorists. What nonsense.

All followers of Islam voluntarily read the same texts and voluntarily pray to the same god. As a result, some voluntarily destroy themselves and many innocent others. The pace of these despicable acts is rapid and uninterrupted, rendering percentage analysis irrelevant. And arguing against severe restriction on the basis of historical perspective is more than irrelevant, it’s irrational. The truth today (and for many, many days in the past) is that only one religion regularly produces suicide terrorists. If this was untrue—if suicide terrorism was not practically the exclusive act of Islamic terrorists—then the first two paragraphs of this article would not resonate.

If the situation we find ourselves in today presents any advantage, it is that suicide terrorists are, almost without fail, associated with a specific religion. That association provides a means to restrict suicide terrorists from performing their cowardly acts within the borders of the United States. To ignore this opportunity is, in a word, unimaginable.