We live in the New Dark Ages --instead of a religious orthodoxy, a political one reigns supreme -- particularly on campuses across the nation.

Leftist professors present their atheistic egalitarianism as the only intelligent position available. Special interest groups inflict the abusive adhominem upon any who disagree with their pronouncements, utilizing new terms such as "homophobic" and "patriarchal." Finally, university administrators oversee the whole process, encouraging the ground troops of Political Correctness by instituting special programs of all types, and reporting to their spiritual leader, the liberal media.

This system is an efficient one, and perhaps some wrongs are corrected in the process. However, it is ruthless, insensitive. We, the students, pay the price -- students who attempt to think and talk genuinely about complex social, political and moral issues such as poverty, racial equity and human sexuality.

Numerous examples of the sacrifice of freedom of speech and thought on the altar of PC have been reported in recent articles. But what about local specifics?

When James Whitehead sent out his essay advocating the killing of homosexuals, despite pressure from the homosexual lobby, then University President Bryce Jordan stated that, though offensive, Whitehead would not be punished for speech protected by the First Amendment.

If Penn State is not as bad as the worst, are we free from danger?

The sobering answer is, "No." There are more subtle mechanisms in place. There are still highly ambiguous passages in the University Student Handbook prohibiting speech which "alarms" a person or group. Also, there are a few lingering posters stating that homophobia (read the belief that homosexuality is immoral) has "no place" at Penn State.

In addition, there is the advent of the University's diversity requirement, that it is calculated to encourage faculty soap-boxing about eurocentrism, homophobia and patriarchies.

With all these forces at work, it is not surprising that the spirit of PC has seeped into the student body. When Dinesh D'Souza, a recognized scholar and critic of affirmative action, spoke at Penn State, the president of the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People demanded an apology from the sponsoring organizations.

While we respect her courage to speak out, it seems to us that such a response discourages discussion on topics which must be explored for the sake of our ailing society.

Though William F. Buckley dedicated his first book, "God and Man at Yale," to it in 1951, PC has finally been recognized in the media for what it is: a fascist suppression of discussion in favor of a fashionable checklist of political solutions.

The 40-year-long period is just about right for the gap between true thinkers and the mainstream press. However, just because PC has been brought into the open, we must not assume that its days are over.

Fortunately, as long as men can read and think, they will do so, in secret enclaves if necessary, from the passion of an attentive soul, and for the sheer delight of a turning mind.

As Aristotle reminds us, there are two elements of human experience which produce intense pleasure. One, of course, is sex. The other is thought.