Preface: This post was started as a comment made on another blog. At Orlando's suggestion (with a cosign from Miguel and TheraP) I am making it into it's own post. For those of you are unaware of my journey of enlightenment here at TPM, please read an earlier post of mine that may help in your determination of how much credence to give my thoughts.

I absolutely do not understand the brouhaha over Rick Warren giving the invocation at the inauguration.

This is not a slap in the face to anyone, and those who think it is would be well served to adjust their attitudes.

We are all Americans. Obama has said over and over that he wanted to be the President for all of the people of the United States, not the President of the Democratic Party. The Christians in this country are not going to go away, nor is the gay and Lesbian population, but attitudes on both sides can be changed. If this is not true, then we might as well give up now, we're screwed.

What is the point of going to all the trouble to elect a man who gives us such hope that this can be a different country, if all you really wanted was someone who was going to keep the polarization going, just from the left this time?

Somehow, some way, we have to come to a place where we start building some trust between the factions. If Obama can't do it, it can't be done. But we have to give him time to do it, in HIS way. We elected him to be him, not someone else. If people thought he was pretending to be someone he isn't to get elected, they are going to be disappointed.

Attitudes don't change overnight. As people get to know one another, fear dissipates. We've made a lot of progress in race relations. Obama is trying to introduce people to each other. He is attempting to show that people from different persuasions, different walks of life, different attitudes, can come together, work together, begin to have empathy for each other. They may never completely embrace each other, but they can come to a place where they can peacefully co-exist.

Some Christians say they will NEVER accept the normalization of gay practices. Well, not too long ago the Mormon Church did not allow blacks to hold the Priesthood. They do now. As more thinking Christians accept the idea that people don't CHOSE to be gay, hearts will soften.

I can see it already. My niece, a very conservative Christian, saw Obama speak at the Aids Forum at Saddleback Church, Rick Warren's church. She was so impressed with him that she not only voted for him, but changed affiliation, became a precinct captain and did everything she could to get him elected. She got past her feelings about gays and abortion to do it. I'm sure there are many others who did the same thing.

Orlando said (in a post at dagblog):

So let's say the 10,000 people who attend Warren's church and the millions of others who read his books are pretty much 100% anti-gay marriage right now. Do you think they'll be more or less willing to change their minds if they feel like their point of view is being heard? I'm not suggesting it has merit. I'm not suggesting they are right. It does not and they are not. If they don't change their minds, their children or grandchildren will. It's only a matter of time. I simply think that we can move that process along if we do it with kindness and respect rather than disdain and hatred. There are enough people in the world peddling that. We don't have to be among them.

I agree whole-heartedly.

As far as Christian leaders go, Rick Warren is not such a bad guy. I would submit that he is doing a lot of soul searching during this process. I believe he is basically a man of honor who is doing the best he can to reconcile his religion and his understanding of the world, as I am.

But every single time people from either side refuse to budge, refuse to try to see the other side's point of view, refuse to try to find some common ground on which to begin to repair the damage, we get further from the time when we can put all this ugliness behind us.

Give him a chance to make this work. Trust him. I believe he has a plan, a big picture. Let him unfold it. Quit 2nd guessing every move he makes. Quit keeping score. Be patient. We can do this.

"We do not have our first black president," the author Christopher Hitchens said on the BBC program "Newsnight." "He is not black. He is as black as he is white."

A Doonesbury comic strip that ran the day after the election showed several soldiers celebrating.

"He's half-white, you know," says a white soldier.

"You must be so proud," responds another.

Pride is the center of racial identity, and some white people seem insulted by a perception that Obama is rejecting his white mother (even though her family was a centerpiece of his campaign image-making) or baffled by the notion that someone would choose to be black instead of half-white.

"He can't be African-American. With race, white claims 50 percent of him and black 50 percent of him. Half a loaf is better than no loaf at all," Ron Wilson of Plantation, Fla., wrote in a letter to the Sun-Sentinel newspaper.

Attempts to whiten Obama leave a bitter taste for many African-Americans, who feel that at their moment of triumph, the rules are being changed to steal what once was deemed worthless _ blackness itself.

"For some people it's honestly confusion," said Favor, the Dartmouth professor. "For others it's a ploy to sort of reclaim the presidency for whiteness, as though Obama's blackness is somehow mitigated by being biracial."

At a time when our our country is falling apart around us, I can hardly believe people are fussing about whether our President is black or white. Let's face it. He's both. He identifies as Black. How could he not? White mother or not, he would have had a tough time trying to "pass."

Can't we just let him be black?  Why would any white person want to co-opt that? I guess in some bizarre way it made it easier for some white folks to vote for him because he has white blood (huh? When did blood become black or white? I thought it was red...) But come on...can't y'all just be glad for all of us that he's our President and let it go? One of the things that ran through my mind on election night, tears pouring down my face, was that now, black children would grow up knowing that in America, they can truly grow up to be ANYTHING they want, something my children have always known...Why would anyone want to take that away from them?

Personally, I don't know what I am anymore. This place and this election have me questioning everything I ever thought I knew, re-evaluating every position I ever thought I held, and wondering how, at the ripe old age of 56, my basic understanding of who I am can be so much in the air and so contradictory.

I personally used to like labels. I liked knowing I was a conservative. I liked knowing I was an Evangelical. Now I'm not sure I'm either, and I don't know what I am instead.  But I find myself needing to redefine who I am, and I no longer seem to fit into any of the clearly defined boxes into which I used to place myself.

I came of age at a time when women had few choices. I had no interest in any of the traditional female careers, so opted to get married and be a stay at home mom until my youngest was in 2nd grade. Then I let the "women's movement" convince me I was less than a whole person if I stayed home and was a wife and mother, so I opened my own business which I adored, and ran it for nearly 20 years, but it was pretty much at the expense of my marriage (which suffered greatly and took YEARS to repair.) Once my 1st grandchild arrived, I realized that family was where my happiness was to be found, sold the business and became a full time wife, mother and grandmother...thus coming full circle.

Both my daughter and daughter-in-law have careers they loved prior to having children, and now that they have lifestyles built around 2 incomes (you just about can't own your own home w/o 2 incomes, at least in CA.) wish they could stay home with their children. Neither are in fields where they can work from home.

This is progress/change, but is it good?

As far as the culture wars go, I do not believe they are over. There are still very strong feelings on both extremes, and getting to the middle is going to be difficult. I consider myself to be a tolerant person. I used to be sure of my positions, but more and more I can quite easily see both sides of most issues. I'm not sure how to bridge them all, but recognizing the validity of opposing positions is a necessary start.

I'm not fond of abortion, but don't want the government making the choice for my family. I feel like this is an issue best left to women, their doctors and their God.  Not all people are Christians, and it seems ridiculous to have laws that demand non-Christians abide by their beliefs. As a Christian, I'm still a little confused as to when life actually begins. Try as I might, I cannot find anyplace in the Bible that says it is at conception. And if it is, why do we not have Christian burials for the product of miscarriages in the 1st trimester?

I don't believe we "chose" who we love, but I am still resistant to the idea of gay couples adopting. I think that I think "marriage" is a religious institution, and all other unions are "civil," so maybe it's time for redefining our relationships. Perhaps all non-Christian unions should be called "unions," save "marriage" for Christians and make sure that all "unions" have the same standing under the law. I'm not sure where that leaves the adoption issue, but at least its a start.

I believe in God and His Son Jesus Christ, but the Christian community really turned me off w/ its performance in this election, and although I love God, have huge issues with my church family to the point where I haven't been to church in months. As Christians, we believe all sin is equal, so the lies that came from the right and the deaths that came about in the unnecessary war in Iraq should be as repugnant to them as the so-called "murder" of unborn children, but where was the outrage?

I believe we are our brother's keepers, but somewhere in the deal there has to be some accountability for one's personal choices. I can't turn my back on starving children or watch sick people lose everything as they struggle to pay medical bills, but I know that welfare is a form of slavery. I know that hard work and saving should be rewarded, yet I think those who makes tons of money have an obligation to the have nots of the world...where do you draw the line? Is it necessary to own 10 houses all over the world and fly around in private jets and have $100 dollar a minute massages, and caviar and $3500 jackets? Can you legislate against that? I don't believe in "forced" socialism, but shouldn't we, as individuals be a little more socialistic? Shouldn't we "self" socialize?

I think government should stay out of our lives as much as possible, and do only those things that we can't do for ourselves, i.e. defense, infra-structure, education, health care, environment, regulations that keep us honest (financial markets -duh, utilities, food/product safety) So in other words, so much for small government :-) !!!