For every homosexual, feminist, drinker, divorcee and all-around moral deviant, there is a middle-aged white person from somewhere in the Midwest doing his best to protect family values from these vicious assailants.

Sometimes, this defender of American apple-pie ideology comes in the form of Tipper Gore, who crusaded valiantly against inappropriate music lyrics before she stopped to devote more time to her job as the official White House homemaker.

Her soccer-mom hair was bobbed around her face as if to shield her ears from the potty mouth of Prince, and she was ready to drive the vice presidential minivan right over every obtainable copy of “Purple Rain.”

Other times, though, these indignant champions of virtuosity take a more surprising approach. Chuck Norris, for example, is taking the approach of being Chuck Norris.

Perhaps, like many of my generation, I have never seen a full episode of “Walker, Texas Ranger” or any part of “Delta Force,” but thanks to Conan O’Brien and the Internet, I know more facts about him than I know about my parents. And, there is one thing I know for sure: Chuck Norris is the opposite of Tipper Gore.

Chuck Norris doesn’t sleep. He waits. But Tipper Gore sleeps soundly in a long, floral-print night gown with a Swedish pillow from Brookstone.

Yet, Chuck Norris, with an endorsement from a values-oriented candidate, Mike Huckabee, is pulling a Tipper Gore – without the blond bob.

In his blog, which is not nearly as interesting as the blog of a champion kung-fu fighter should be, Chuck Norris recently spoke about his support of the ordained minister who is “not afraid to stand up for a Creator and against secularist beliefs.”

To hear a man who is supposed to be able to count to infinity twice talk about why church and state should be integrated is like finding out Hostess cupcakes are actually made out of animal carcasses and petroleum byproduct. It’s just not enjoyable anymore.

In addition to serving on the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (as bad as that sounds), Chuck Norris is also, unsurprisingly, interested in saving marriage. Not with his healing tears, but by passing a Constitutional amendment that says marriage is between a man and a woman. Perhaps his beard isn’t hiding another fist – maybe it’s just a weak chin.

But luckily for all of America’s moral deviants, there is another powerful bearded guy just waiting to take Chuck Norris’ place in pop culture lore. Enter Albus Dumbledore.

Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling revealed last week while speaking at Carnegie Hall that the iconic wizard is gay.

After the seventh book, fans had speculated about Hogwarts’ headmaster’s sexuality, but it was only with the disconsolate lethargy of obsessive Potter disciples with nothing left to argue or debate. The same fans were trying to argue that Harry had a bestial relationship with Buckbeak the Hippogriff.

When Rowling gave credence to what had only been very weak rumors about Dumbledore, it was to the delight of fans everywhere. At the very least, she provided a new topic to rehash on comment boards everywhere.

Conservative Web sites, such as WorldNetDaily.com – where Chuck Norris blogs with the likes of Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan – have been slower to respond.

But based on Chuck Norris’ political beliefs, probably he and all his companions would like to deliver to Rowling a roundhouse kick to the face.

Guaranteed to beat them to it is Laura Mallory, whose approach to Harry Potter is of the Tipper Gore variety.

The mother of four has been trying to get Harry Potter books removed from local Georgia schools because the books contain “evil themes, witchcraft, demonic activity, murder, evil blood sacrifice, spells and teaching children all of this.”

Just wait until she finds out the series also teaches them homosexuality.

In Mallory’s eyes, it would have been the ultimate vindication if Dumbledore had cruised around Hogwarts’ bathrooms, flitting his feet out to occupied stalls, a la Larry Craig.

Of course, Dumbledore’s sexuality is never mentioned in the books, and while it fits the facts, it’s impossible to really infer this without background information.

One NBC commentator offered that dealing with Dumbledore’s sexuality would have been more challenging and eye-opening if it had played a role in the book, instead of just being an author’s sidenote.

But by omitting this fact from the book, Rowling wasn’t plotting for people to glaze it over a few months later, she was making the important point that people need not be defined by their sexuality, but rather by their choices and actions.

She was also eliminating the need for an awkward chapter involving Dumbledore’s poorly thought-out wand innuendos and a coming-out party.

Rowling’s family values might not be traditional, but her message of tolerance is certainly worth more than Chuck Norris’.