What's the moral of the story?

You're either "with us," or you're the other 49 percent of the population. That's what this election proved. \nFor Democrats, the Red Sea of states did not part, the South opened its floodgates, and there was no exodus from Bush's religious right-wing agenda.\nReflecting on the results of last week's election, pollsters said 22 percent of voters picked "moral values" as their number one reason for voting. "Moral values" exceeded the percentages of voters who claimed the economy, the war in Iraq and terrorism were their deciding factors in this election. \nThe problem is how do we heal a divided nation if there is no common ground? It seems there's a red side and a blue side to every issue, yet there are no shades of purple in between. \nThe obvious moral issues that come to mind are gay marriage referendums, abortion rights and embryonic stem cell research: sex, sex and sex. \nOn one hand, many Americans oppose these issues for religious reasons. Eleven states had referendums to define marriage, and all of them passed. Bush even threatened to amend the federal constitution, effectively outlawing gay marriage for the entire country. \nOn the other hand, many Americans support these issues for their own ethical reasons. They see the danger in this trend of "moral values" because of the way it alters the fundamental beliefs of the nation's founders. Traditionally, amendments have always given Americans more freedom, not revoked freedom. The only exception was alcohol prohibition, and that was a historical failure that was later overturned. \nBush shouts from the highest mountaintop that we must "free" Iraqis and "free" Afghanis. Why does the president use religion and "moral values" to give freedom to other countries, yet uses the same religion and "moral values" to take American freedoms away? \nThe 80 percent of Bush voters who said "moral values" brought them to the polls have been conned. Bush doesn't employ faith to unite the country; he uses faith to divide it. \nThis president has orchestrated a first term, a campaign and a platform for his second term on a "good versus evil," "righteous versus fearful," "with us, or against us" mentality. \nIn his acceptance speech, he spoke of his desire to mend the nation's political division. The truth is he has no intention of compromise. Division is how he disables this country and scares it into groveling for an all-powerful leader who will make the decisions for it.\nIf Bush hadn't manipulated Americans with "moral values," the war after Sept. 11 would have remained in Afghanistan. Instead, a "War on Terror" changed the profile of the enemy. Once, the target was al Qaeda; now, it's ideology. \nMaybe the "moral values" poll refers to a desire for a stronger Christianity against Islam. There's a fine line between what Bush calls "ideology of hate" and what a large majority considers "the religion of Islam." Because the president hasn't clearly defined the "ideology" America purportedly opposes, many people have misconceived this war as a fight against Islam, and not a fight against the terrorists who attacked us. \nAnti-Muslim sentiment has radically increased in the last four years, and the current administration is responsible for augmenting Americans' fear of terrorism into Americans' bigotry against Islam. \nWhether the "moral values" have to do with a fear of Mr. and Mr. Jones or a fear of Muslims, Bush has propagated the notion that intolerance makes a wholesome society. \nThere's irony involved here. \nDoes America really want a moral leader? President Bush lied to the country about Iraq, and he put troops in harm's way without a viable exit strategy. \nA nation impassioned by "moral values" just re-elected the antithesis of a moral leader.