I favor Mr. Silverback's approach to terrorists threatening my kids. First, it is my responsibility and not the governnment's or yours or anyone else's. Second, the terrorists who try to harm my kids should consider that they will not have any opportunities to repeat their efforts. Next, it is an acknowledged truism that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. I am not interested in unifying with those so weak that they put their kids in trust to socialist skewels and put them at risk. Next, civility is chronically overused in our society. If the best defense of an idea is that one person's opinion is as good as another's, that notion of the weakest link is back in play.
Paying lip service to the rights of manifest stupidity is not a winning strategy in the WOT.
Neither is gathering school kids in well-advertised gummint indoctrination centers a winning strategy. Urban riots in the 1960s damaged the neighborhoods of the rioters but the rioters lacked the numbers or the insight to seriously attack the decentralized (and often very well-armed) middle class in even the inner suburbs.
Finally, as to "embarrassment", I saw your editorial conclusion but saw no argument as to substance. Is there some actual reason to mince words and play make believe in deference to the socialist skeweling enthusiasts other than "unity" which may be desired but is unlikely to be achieved? I must say that this plea for "unity" sounds like something out of Nixon's second campaign: "Bring us together!!!!" said the little girl's poster as he passed on a train.
I think we need to deal with reality. This is not Oprah or Ellen Degenerate or the MSM.
You sir, are an ignorant ass; determined and destined to remain so.
Which is...aim for the center mass. :-)