In 1777, the Continental Congress approved the purchase of 20,000 Bibles. In 1904, the 57th Congress, in an effort to restrain unethical behavior, voted to have copies of Thomas Jefferson’s book, “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth” reprinted. It was then distributed to the members of the congress and senate. It was paid for with tax dollars and published by the Smithsonian Institution.

Today, using tax money to print and distribute a book on ethical behavior would be outrageous, yet we fund offensive and blasphemous art.

Today, schools and libraries fight hard to prevent Internet filters to protect children from online predators, but they object when it is suggested that religious books or the Bible are included in curriculum.

Today, books dealing with witchcraft and sorcery are taught in schools, but ones dealing with angels and the Holy Spirit are banned.

In less than one hundred years, as a nation, we have brought to life the verse in the Bible that says in the end days, they will call good evil, and evil, they will call good. Is this a coincidence?

The Sixty’s counter-culture is now the establishment that they fought so hard to overthrow.  But they know, instinctively, that it is a matter of time before they are de-throwned and the next group of leaders displace them.

The only thing is, they are waiting for an heir apparent that they have trained on non-absolutes and amorality.  That is like planting a seed in a dark crack in the sidewalk and expecting it to blossom and bring forth fruit.

No, the revolution, the next move, will come from those they have been classified as the extremists and disenfranchised from the national debate. Those who clung to virtue as a matter of survival.

The ones who were raised by the hand a nurturing mother, who sacrificed her career, her desires, for her children, who would one day, raise a standard of excellence in the shaky ground of immorality.

The ones who have been rejected, ridiculed, scorned . . . will be the ones who will lead a dysfunctional nation.

Ironically, it’s like Christ, who was despised, rejected, abused, denied …but lead the world in peace and love. As we approach the new millennium, the coincidence is too great to be an accident.

What do you do about unsolicited pornography that is being sent to you by e-mail?

It is a problem for many people who get spammed constantly. And these are not air brushed centerfolds, these are hardcore, brutal, dehumanizing pictures often involving children. They are clearly illegal, yet the government doesn’t seem interested in stopping this multi-billion dollar illegal industry.

You would think the lost taxes alone would get their blood going. But I have an idea on how to get their attention and maybe get some action.

Since we all know that the government monitors all e-mail and is looking for key buzz words, such as anthrax, fissionable plutonium, North Korea, militia, assassination, bomb, etc., forward all your spammed mail to them using one or all of these hot button words.

Maybe they would see it’s not a plot against the government, but is an illegal plot to destroy the culture. And perhaps we could start cleaning up the internet and our mailboxes.

If the government concerned itself with real threats to the society, and especially our children, and stopped seeing each of us as potential criminals, then maybe we could make the streets safe again for kids to walk on.

The other night I was at an event to raise money for projects in Africa. It was international and there were far more African-Americans than caucasoids.

During the evening, a beautiful song came on and everyone rose to sing it. I asked what it was and they said it was the “Negro National Anthem.”

My innocent response was, “for which country?” The guests at the table stared at me as though I had just landed from another planet and said, “America, of course.”

“I thought we already had a national anthem,” I continued naively. “No, that is for the white man, not us.”

I asked if there was a Blonde national anthem too . . . or Hispanic, or Asian.

But as I sat there watching people sing with pride a song that divides the races, I thought about what Rosa Parks must have felt, sitting on the back of the bus, not welcome to participate in the bounties of America, and excluded solely because of the color of her skin.

Here we are on the eve of a new millennium and it seems as though things haven’t changed much, they just have new names. Is this really the dream Martin Luther King had for America?

Because there are so many cultures and tastes, taboos and no-nos, it is hard to please everyone all the time.

The idea of a global village is only possible if you moderate and destroy extremes and train people to have bland taste and safe ideas.

At the fiftieth Anniversary of the U.N. it was a difficult task to try and serve sixty-five heads of states without insulting any.

That meant no shellfish, no pork, no beef and no sauces that included alcohol.

It also meant no white flowers on the tables, because some Asian cultures associate white flowers with funerals. They could not afford for a dignitary to take religious or cultural offense at any ingredient in the hors d’oeuvres.

They couldn’t take the chance that one dignitary might be served his wild-rice-and-wheat berry pilaf before another, and perceive it as an insult. So, what did the caterer end up serving? What do you serve when you don’t want to offend anyone? Chicken.

How appropriate that the Global village, comprised of a society based on the lowest common denominator, so as not to offend . . . is full of . . . chickens. Rather ironic.

A female teacher in a public school is complaining that the librarian of the school, who is a man who dresses like a woman . . . uses the ladies room.

She feels it violates her right to privacy and it makes her feel uncomfortable. What is shocking though, is that she isn’t offended that a cross dresser is dealing daily with young impressionable minds. What about their rights?

And if the school continues to allow this behaviour, what is going to keep a group of creative young men from donning dresses one day just to have access to the girls room? Or vice versa?

And if this behaviour is acceptable to society who will protect the young co-ed from a man who dresses in women’s clothing merely for the purpose of gaining access to the girls dorm to commit mayhem?

And if homosexuals can’t be excluded from the Boy Scouts . . .what about cross-dressers? For example a woman who dresses as a man?

And, if she is allowed to join, then why not let women in? Will cross-dressing men then be allowed to join the Girl Scouts? Where do we draw the line on this increased absurdity? Is it only when our personal rights are violated.

The Mormon church in California opposes the legalization of same-sex marriages and have been raising money to fight the issue.   As a result, they have been reported to the IRS for violating their tax exempt status.

Yet there are several homosexual activists groups who have a similar tax exempt standing who have not been reported to the IRS by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Do we smell hypocrisy again from the left?

But what is really interesting, is that of all the groups in America that have a bonafide right to oppose same sex marriages . . . it is the Mormons.

After all, they were told by the Federal Government that they could not have more than one wife even though that had been part of their religious belief system.

So if the IRS tells the Mormon church they can’t express an opinion, educate their parishioner and take a moral stand on an issue that is important to them . . . won’t they have to tell the pro-homosexual groups the same?

And if for some reason Californians do vote to legally acknowledge same-sex marriages . . . won’t they necessarily have to allow Mormons to have more than one wife?

There is a move to redefine hate speech and hate crimes. It is actually redundant to all actions that are now illegal.

Do we question that a man hates a woman when he rapes her? That certainly isn’t an act of love.

Does a man of one race kill one of another race because he loves him? No . . . whatever the motivation . . . it is still a murder and it was obviously hateful.

But what if the hate takes on a more elitist character . . . one less hostile, but more, say, artistic?

For example the anti-Catholic art exhibit in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Because it is artistic in nature, it is intended to be controversial, illicit passion and emotion.

Art is after all . . .the great license of the age. But we the public are not supposed to think it is hateful to see “blasphemous misuses of rosary beads and crucifixes”, or to see the Virgin Mary depicted as the “Great Harlot.”

But what if a very impressionable person learned to hate Catholics as a result of this display and committed a hate crime against one?

Or what if this artist decided it was another group that he wanted to defile? It becomes selective hate . . . and teaches people to tolerate some types of hate. But when society fails to draw that line . . . people start doing it themselves . . . and . . . its not a pretty picture.

The recent Woodstock 99 concert was a disaster by anyone’s standards. Looting, burning, rape, mayhem.  But the reaction has been restrained with explanations ranging from “its just kids having fun,” to “this isn’t the sixties anymore.”

Well that’s true, but arson, rape and larceny are still crimes, no matter what decade you hail from. But what is amazing is the lack of concern about the debauchery against women, when there was such great concern, during the Promise Keepers rally, that women were being forced to be submissive.

The talk shows were buzzing, feminists were pulling out their hair, and liberals were wringing their hands that women could possibly be happy with one man in a committed, loving relationship. There was a cry to liberate the women from this brand of brainwashing by dangerous men.

So dangerous that a million of them, testosterone laden, could gather on the mall, for an entire day, and not have one incident of violence or abuse.

So, let me ask those who condemned Promise Keepers while ignoring the abuse of women at Woodstock 99 . . . which group of men would you want their young virginal daughter walking through alone?

In some public schools in Northern Virginia the children have a very interesting view of history.

Some think, the sun never set on the British Empire because the British Empire is in the East and the sun sets in the West.

Karl Marx became one of the Marx brothers.

Handel was half German half Italian and half English. He was very large.

Voltaire invented electricity.

The Constitution of the United States was adopted to secure domestic hostility.

Benjamin Franklin said “a horse divided against itself cannot stand.”

Even though these are some humorous responses to history questions, the one thing that many young 13 year-old-girls have learned, and practice on campus, was taught to them by the leader of the free world.

The peer pressure for young girls is to emulate Monica Lewinsky’s performance on the President, and their excuse is, that the President does it.

So we might think it is funny that kids get a few facts wrong on a history test, but no one is laughing when these same kids are prostituting themselves because parents have decided that character doesn’t count and history is only important when it is revised.