Considering the recent school shooting in Florida, other similar incidents, and the moral panic they have caused, Natalia Dashan and David Gelernter ask what, exactly, has gone wrong:

No child should have to ask his mother whether he is likely to die today at school. But no mother should wonder whether her child is apt to kill someone, either. . . . And the bigger question, the elephant in the room trumpeting constantly as we ignore him: who rears our children nowadays? Where does a child get his conscience? Who supervises children day-to-day while they learn to be human beings?

Religion used to give parents a reason to discuss good and evil, right and wrong with their children. Religious schools used to help fill the gaps in a child’s moral worldview. Yes, some children figure it all out for themselves—but many don’t. This used to be a religious country, and still is. But children learn less about religion than they used to. Does religion matter, in practical terms? What made Americans such a stubbornly religious people in the past? . . .

Some children show good moral judgment, generally because of their families. Some children don’t. But if they are sent to religious school or Sunday school, they all stand a chance of learning to think things over from a moral viewpoint. Their families are the best places for such thinking. But their families might be too busy—might be exhausted getting a living; might be embarrassed and not know where to start; might feel incompetent to discuss the topic. Or they might not give a damn after all. In any case, Sunday school is better than nothing. . . .

But nowadays we send fewer and fewer children to Sunday school. And their weekday schools treat religion and the Bible as toxic substances to be avoided at all costs. Children who used to grow up with Christianity and the Bible are not likely to read Aristotle or Kant instead. Too many grow up morally illiterate. . . .

The Bible was the most important unifying force in American history: Puritans and Catholics, evangelicals and the poshest Episcopalians, trailer-park residents and mansion-dwellers, old WASP stock and Jewish immigrants from Poland, blacks and whites read the good book. But we have shrugged off the moral education of our children. What do we think will happen now?

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.