...that you were so 'inspired' by my annoyance at the misuse of "Democrat" to describe a particular political party, that you went to the trouble to set up a Salon username in Bizarro-world that purports to mock mine.

Really. So you're a curmudgeon, not an redneck idiot. (Are you also Daine Zaccheo of FPO Iraq?) Glad you cleared that up for me...

The Fairness Doctrine? Really? I was surprised to see this righty boogeyman make an appearance in your column. I enjoy your writing exactly because I believe that you are bigger than any of the boxes that people try to fit you into, feminist, et al. But the Fairness Doctrine, whatever you think of its mertis has NO SERIOUS CHANCE OF COMING BACK. EVER. When the Obama administration is over and there is still no Fariness Doctrine being enforced, the right will crow and say "Thank God we opposed this censorship with all our might!" But in reality, no one of any consequence is seriously talking about bringing this back and the chances of it happening compared to the volume of outrage on the right is really uncalled for. Color me disappointed in you, Ms Paglia for joining in the faux-outrage.

The uproar about Democrats' desire to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine is a bunch of hot gas. There is NO drive to do that. I don't know if Rush made that up or where that came from, but no one is pushing for it at all.

Whether the Shroud is real is a red herring. The West has no tradition of the "Avatar", the God realized person whose function is to awaken others. Thus those like Jesus have appeared quite often, even in recent history, although their role may have not been as public or ordained to be as vast as it became. If you can be open, I'd suggest reading The Autobiography of a Yogi and see how many elevated men and women close to or equal to Jesus' stature there have been, even in the 20th century. Since I had an ongoing discipleship of one of these, I can attest to the remarkable nature of interacting with someone who is a living channel for what might be termed "source" or "God".

BTW, I hate to admit anything Paglia writes has mertit, but her pointing out that as to how the New Testament was written is quite near the mark. Your pointing out of "Doubting Thomas" is a verification of your ignorance in this regard. First why is he not in the other three Gospels and only in John? The answer lies in the Gnostic text, "Gospel of Thomas" (written at the same time as John) which in many ways counters John's fundamental position. Thomas and Thomas' followers claimed to have superior knowledge given by Jesus of which John doubted and fiercely contested. Thus the inclusion of Thomas as the doubter is a political act by John in a theological fight, not a historical reality. Similarly the "No man comes to the father..." and next passsage are not cooincidentally directed to the two disciples who play the strongest role in the Gnostic library, Thomas and Phillip. John is taking shots all over the place because of HIS belief in his perspective. Elaine Pagels covers this very well in her wonderful book "Beyond Belief".

Since the Johanian point of view won out in the terrible political wars among Christians, principally at Nicea in 323 (Nicean creed), all it means is the winning perspective has become Christan orthodoxy. It has nothing to do with truth or who Jesus was. As a matter of fact the opening to John, among other passages, "In the beginning was the word...) was added in LATER and was not part of the original text. It was part of the process that elevated Jesus to Godhood independent of the divinity of everyone, even other great world teachers, a stance in my opinion Jesus never supported.

Dear Camile, your pompous assumption that all LGBT memories from early childhood have nothing to do with sexual orientation but are mere reflections on "feeling differet" is patently offensive. Your argument is uninformed, authoritative and ignorant. You can choose to say that my desire to marry the handsome young pup "Robin" in my kindergarden class was just me trying to express my difference but it wasn't. It was my burgeoning sexuality and to this day, when I feel love toward my same-sex husband, it has the same tone, emotional complexity and feeling that I had that day that I proposed to my same-sex classmate.

Grow up, Camile. In the same way that your heterosexuality is not merely the result of a complex interaction in your environment, neither is mine. The old "we're all bisexual" argument has never been validated by literature. What has been supported are brain scans, appendage measurements (fingers, not the other), and the number of older brothers (for men, not women).

Educate yourself and stop pretending to be an expert in matters that you are not. When you are talking about the most deeply held beliefs, images and experiences in millions of people, it is insensitive and unethical for you to run your mouth with such abandon.

Although I am not a regular reader of Salon, I have on several occasions read your very readable column. You are perhaps the only liberal that I have read that is so full of common sense. Whether its the treatment of Sarah Palin (I love that woman), or your take on global warming, you are full of uncommon common sense. You are more of what I think a conservative should be than many self-proclaimed conservatives e.g. John McCain. I'm going to read you more often.

I was going to do the same thing!

Except not in as much detail.

Perhaps I can simply give a good catch all summary, so that people won't have to read any of Camille's future columns.

Dear Camille,

I am a conservative. Democrats suck. Obama sucks. Sarah Palin rocks! I hate abortion and gays and I love Jesus! I am also old have nostalgia for old things, which I will now reference . I also hate edumacated liberals in those fancy-pants universities! Oh, I don't believe in science, either.

Love,

Conservativeguy

Dear Conservativeguy,

I am so in agreement with you! I believe Democrats and Obama suck, despite my assertions that I'm a Democrat and voted for Obama! Sarah Palin is my all time favorite fantasy crush, too!

While I have to make some statement here that I can reference to support a future assertion that I'm pro-choice and gay, I will agree with you that other pro-choice folks suck, as well as gay activists (unless they're me).

I love Jesus, too. Even though I'm an atheist. Really, I just love anything you do. Truly, I do.

And old things! I love your reference to that old thing, which I will now use to contrive a mention of something I wrote 30 years ago.

And, of course, I despise academia with a passion. It sucks! It's far too liberal and pretentious and judgmental. As is science - it just doesn't feel right to me. I'm certainly glad you and I are not pretentious or judgmental like that!

In closing, I'd like to plug something else that I read that I just uncritically think is the bees knees.

Hugs and kisses,

Camille