As a columnist, I get a lot of e-mails from readers. I always encourage those who contact me to consider writing a letter to the editor and share their thoughts with other readers. And I do this whether the letter writer agrees or disagrees with my point of view.

Occasionally a reader takes exception to the placement of my column and wonders why a biblical world view is allowed to appear on the opinion page. One letter-to-the-editor that appeared in a New Jersey newspaper last year serves as an example.

The writer led with: “After reading Gregory J. Rummo's…[column], the question I'm left with is how did he move from the religion page to the editorial page?”

The truth is a biblical world view belongs exactly where you are reading it now, on the editorial page or the op-ed page of this newspaper.

I refer dissenters to the December 8, 2003 issue of US News & World Report in which appeared a “special report” entitled, “The New Evangelicals.” The editors thought it was such an important story they featured it on the front cover of the magazine.

The article examined evangelical’s “bold take on Christianity” and concluded that it is “changing America.”

What I found most interesting were these statistics cited in the article: “Today, according to a Gallup survey, roughly 4 out of 10 Americans identify themselves as evangelical or born-again Christians.”

Indeed, a biblical or a Judeo-Christian or an “evangelical” view of life is representative of mainstream America.

So what’s all the fuss?

Why are Christians consistently bashed in the mainstream media and branded as right-wing fanatics or extremists? Shouldn’t a view that reflects 40% of America belong on the opinion pages of every newspaper in the country? And that begs the question: why shouldn’t 4 out of 10 opinion columns reflect a biblical-world view or portray Christians in a positive light?

The US News story had the answer, explaining how that “many outside the tradition [of evangelical Christianity] still tend to reduce evangelicals, and particularly prominent leaders and televangelists to a conveniently dismissible stereotype: Bible-thumping, intolerant know-nothings.”

Because many “outside the tradition,” are found in places such as academia, newsrooms and the mainstream media in general, evangelicals almost never receive positive coverage in the news, let alone a regular voice on the opinion pages of a prestigious newspaper.

And if an evangelical writer should be so lucky as to be thrown a bone, an editor almost always makes sure he emphasizes that he disagrees with the point of view — as if he might catch the cooties — but is running it anyway as a token of fairness or all-inclusiveness.

Earlier this year I wrote a column entitled “Media Doesn’t Know Boykin or Bible.” Army Lt. Gen William Boykin is the Deputy Undersecretary of defense for intelligence and war fighting support. You may remember he dared characterize the US’s war against terror as a clash with “Satan,” and Islamic radical’s hatred of America “because we’re a Christian Nation.”

General Boykin’s comments may have been embarrassing to his superiors, but only because they were fanned into a major conflagration by a media bent on destroying anyone who takes his Christian faith seriously.

It’s stories like these that remind me of Jesus’ words: “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.”

Yet, I’d like to believe things are changing, in America at least, which was founded as a nation on the Judeo-Christian ethic.

The US News story offers some hope in this regard: “When researchers focus on ordinary evangelicals…they find more diversity, complexity and ambivalence than conventional wisdom would lead us to expect.”

But not to complain too much — especially on this page — where the editor has, to his credit, bucked the trend and given my evangelical view of current events a regular space.