Clearly, we as a society have now assumed lunacy to be the norm against which the normal are measured and found lacking.

A father expresses concern over the wisdom of hiring a homosexual to teach sex education to 6th graders at the school his son attends, and the principal, finding that "concern" to be politically incorrect, bars his son from re-enrollment. The father ultimately had to incur the expense of taking it to court to have a judge reverse the principal's decision.

Elsewhere, a student-employee received an unsolicited e-mail from a professor at a New Jersey state university that promoted lesbian relationships. The student-employee then replied, asking the professor to not send him any more of such e-mails because, as a practicing Muslim, he believed lesbianism to be a perversion and thus found the e-mails offensive. Subsequently, his response was ... reported to officials at the university who then officially reprimanded him. They concluded his use of the term "perversion" was a violation of state discrimination and harassment regulations. He also, has now had to sue to have the letter of reprimand removed from his personnel file.

It would appear from these examples that tolerance in the world of the politically correct is a one way street. You must tolerate their politically correct view completely, or at least in silence. Yet, they have no reciprocal obligation to tolerate your view should you disagree with them. How fair is that? Or, put differently, how convenient is that for politically correct groups to accelerate the advancement of their agendas?

We truly have entered into the age of socially acceptable madness.

Beyond Political Correctness: Are There Limits to This Lunacy? ASIN: 1563840669