Liberal groups that routinely use the court systems to achieve political ends often speak glowingly of the "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

This phrase was first uttered in 1958 by then Chief Justice Earl Warren in a case involving cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Since then, these same words have often been quoted in regard to other matters, ranging from the right to have an abortion to the need for affirmative action and even the limits that ought to apply to speech and religious freedom.

It's safe to say that by now, the public is neatly divided into two camps: one that believes the courts should continue to be a major agent of political change and the other that advocates curtailment of judicial power.

Those in the former group have long had abundant reasons to celebrate. Now, those in the latter group have something to cheer about.

A sitting judge in Missouri, Robert H. Dierker Jr., has, in his own words, broken the "code of silence to expose the liberal judicial assault." Dierker's book, "The Tyranny of Tolerance," is a compelling account of how the court system has been hijacked.

The book is a call for Americans to "wrest control of our country and our society from judicial philosopher kings" and their supporters in law schools and the mass media.

What makes the volume particularly interesting is his central argument that a misunderstanding of what constitutes "tolerance" is at the root of what is wrong with the courts.

"The liberal agenda is tolerance," he writes. "But tolerance in the liberal cosmos has a rather intolerant aura ... . Tolerant liberals are the ones who file lawsuits to kick the Boy Scouts out of public parks, to get sodomy made into a constitutional right, ... to allow abortionists to pull babies three-quarters of the way out of the womb and kill them, ... to bankrupt the firearms industry as a means of disarming a free people, to impose racial quotes on employers, to prevent the expulsion of punks from public schools," and so on.

Dierker attempts to answer the urgent question: "How much tolerance can we stand?" He does so by pointing out the very short distance between the assurance of "liberty" (a good thing) and arrival of the merely "libertine" (a bad thing). He also illustrates why there should be a much greater concern with growing judicial control of the public school system, a control that has allowed liberals to enforce, at public expense, the spread of what they call "tolerance." What has happened in public schools with the spread of political correctness, Dierker insists, can't be pleasing to anyone except radical liberals. Certainly it is of no comfort to the average parent.

He rails against the type of case filed just this week by a U.S. AIDS treatment group against the makers of Viagra, a drug for erectile dysfunction. The suit claims that recent promiscuous behavior and the spread of disease by homosexual men was prompted by or was the result of ads for Viagra. This type of "you-made- me-behave-badly" lawsuit has been previously used against the tobacco industry, fast-food outlets and gun manufacturers, among many other targets.

The author also outlines judicial excesses committed in the name of feminism, gay rights, race discrimination, abortion and concern for the rights of terrorists. On the topic of the death penalty, he offers up a particularly confused and disgraceful judicial history and finally asks whether the nation has mistakenly adopted an "evolving standard of idiocy." It's a timely question.

In the end, the Dierker recommends action - or, more aptly, resistance - by the two other branches of government that would act to limit the sweep of judicial authority, recognizing that first public opinion must be better mobilized.

His prescription isn't particularly novel, but his perspective certainly is. At a time when things aren't going particularly well for political conservatives, his book is as welcome as a spring breeze.

Al Knight of Fairplay (alknight@mindspring.com) is a former member of The Post's editorial-page staff. His column appears on Wednesdays.