The American Spectator

p>The writer who commented on the 40th anniversary of the sexual revolution seems to have a few things wrong in his analogy. In comparing the “sexual revolution” in the same class as economic and religious liberty is erroneous. First. the latter two meant progression for people in the realm of freedom while the former actually is an enslavement with dire consequences. Neither is it new in our culture. There have been more than a few periods in American history where sexual promiscuity (the proper term for that type of liberation) has been in the forefront and each time it has resulted in disaster for those who practiced it. The same is true today with AIDS, venereal diseases on the rise, hepatitis C, etc. Already there are signs that this type of “liberation” is becoming passé. So while it may be sometime before we get back to the “old morality,” we will get there. Thank you. br> — Pete Chagnon /p> p> I once heard it said that the only thing revolutionary about the sexual revolution was that people talked more about sex than they used to. I laugh when I hear the abortion liberals on one hand imply they invented sex and on the other scream bloody murder about “the era of back alley abortions” that preceded the sexual revolution. Hmmm — which was it? br> — Ed Callahan /p> p> BORN TOO LATE br> In his article ” Senator Kerry on Parade ,” Lawrence Henry makes the intriguing suggestion that the Democrats nominate rising star Rep. Harold Ford (D-Tenn.) for president. /p>

Fortunately (or unfortunately), however, that’s an impossibility in 2004, as Ford has not yet reached the constitutionally mandated minimum age of 35.