Part II: I want an angry president

Last week's column, "I want an angry president," garnered several responses -- from right here to Facebook to email to voicemail. It apparently hit a nerve. If you missed it, read it at semissourian.com/story/2315102.html before continuing.

Most people commenting said they were in agreement with my perspective, that I conveyed what they hadn't found words to say. The multitude of high praises and thank yous magnified for me just how concerned people are about terrorism and about how U.S. leadership is -- or is not -- dealing with it.

Of course, there is always dissent. Though the number of dissenters pale in comparison to those who ... well, know better, dissenters deserve to be heard also. So dissenters, I heard you. I think you're way off, but I heard you.

I heard the word "love" and "Christian" applied to terrorism in interesting ways. Let's start with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who, after first announcing that references to Islam and the Islamic State would be redacted from the Orlando terror attack transcripts later reversed course -- only following an outcry from the American people, who are tired of political correctness. The attorney general's comments included this: "Our most effective response to terror and to hatred is compassion, it's unity, and it's love,"

That sounds really sweet, but what does it mean? After all, love is more of a verb than a noun. It's not just a feeling, but an action. So what does that kind of love actually look like? Redacting transcripts for PC purposes? Staging sit-ins to push gun control? Yelling at Christians for wanting to protect themselves? This is the kind of "compassion," "unity" and "love" people reject. They would rather see the kind of love that protects the innocent, unleashes hell on the guilty and yes, forgives the enemy -- once he repents.

Some claim Christians should reserve judgment, rather than expecting leadership to do whatever is necessary to push back against the threats we face. "We're supposed to exercise unconditional love," a couple told me. These people baffle me. Yes, we, as individuals, are called to love. The government and law enforcement, however, are called to protect; that's how they demonstrate love.

And speaking of Christianity, I am convinced that some who claim to be Christians today wouldn't have liked Jesus very much. He was no namby-pamby weakling who tolerated everything because of an erroneous concept of love. Some of these people would have told Christ himself he wasn't Christian enough. They remind me of those who permit relatives with jobs to live in their home without paying rent or contributing to utilities, all the while thinking this is what Christianity is. That's not Christianity; that's weakness masquerading as love.

This administration can play the race card, the women card, the gender-neutral card, the Islam card. But with all their card-playing, they still cannot call a spade a spade. And now, they tell us that we're not loving enough, even as the enemy cuts off heads, burns people alive and shoots up others after holding them hostage for three hours in a nightclub. These people who scold the innocent for not showing love, who scold those who tell the president to call evil by its name, would have scolded Jesus, too, because, surely, he would have called out terrorists, told them they were evil, then cast the devil out of them. Now, that's love. And anyone who doubts the veracity of my assertion might want to read the Bible. Jesus was no joke, and he was tougher with the religious church folk back then than some religious church folk are willing to be with radical killers today -- and yet he epitomized love.

Love speaks the truth, love identifies both good and evil and love offers repentance. But love does not pretend repentance isn't required. Love does not make excuses for doing nothing when something is appropriate. And if the thought of people lying on the Pulse nightclub floor because of one armed man's advantage over dozens of unarmed innocents doesn't move you, then you need to check your pulse.

To those who believe anger is a sin, and ask how dare anyone say they want an angry president: Stop questioning the Christianity of those who want to see anger that is both real and rational in our president, and note, rather, that the Bible says to "be angry and sin not." See, one does not preclude the other. I believe in lovingly praying for our enemies to change, and I do pray. I also believe in handing down consequences for evil actions in the meantime.

So on behalf of all who hold accountable those who swore "to protect and serve," who took an oath to "defend ... against all enemies, foreign and domestic," I -- lovingly -- request that you spare us your definition of love based on your manmade idea of what it's supposed to look like. We'll stick to what love truly is.

Adrienne Ross is an editor, writer, public speaker, online radio show host, former teacher and coach, Southeast Missourian editorial board member, and owner of Adrienne Ross Communications. Reach her at aross@semissourian.com.