When some people see it, thy see more than one—they see two.  What do you see when you see the word “outrage?”  Do you see “out” and “rage?”

Some people try to understand the etymology of outrage by defining it in the context of “out” and “rage.”  To do so is to misunderstand the origins of the word.  Early usage of the word is traced from the Middle English sense of a “lack of moderation” back to its Latin roots of “ultra” or “beyond,” and it has little to do with “out” and “rage.”

Even though I understand the meaning and the roots of outrage, to simply say that the religiously intolerant exhibit a “lack of moderation” seems grossly inadequate.  It seems there is a radical element that has little more than an elementary understanding of their religion.  To espouse the idea of peace and love and then kill in the name of religion is outrageous.

Two recent incidents serve as an example:

• The terrorist activity in France and the cold-blooded attack on Charlie Hebdo and the team of cartoonists who focused on satire.
• The massacre of innocents by Boko Haram which, according to Amnesty International, has resulted in the death of some 2,000 people in Nigeria.

As I said late last week:

It seems unreasonable that someone can be offended by cartoons, but at the same time promote rape, beheadings, hostage taking, forced marriages, genital mutilation, and suicide bombings

What happened to a simple life based on the Golden Rule? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

The Abu Dawud offers the Golden rule in these words:  “Do unto all men as you would wish to have done unto you; and reject for others what you would reject for yourselves.”

The world will be a better place when we stop out-raging people and begin out-loving them.