By RAY WADDLE

A battle of two moralities is roaring in this country — really, a battle between two views of God — and it explains nearly everything, and nearly everyone ignores it.

An unspoken conflict of attitudes toward parenting — Strict Parent model vs. Nurturing Parent — shapes the showdown between conservatives and liberals across the board, whether at worship, in Congress or on the Iraq war.

Take the current woes over sexuality in the Episcopal Church, resentments that threaten to fracture the denomination and incite a divorce between world Anglicanism and liberal American church life.

The conflict is conventionally described as a fight over homosexuality, a death struggle between traditionalists and modernizers.

Each side quotes Scripture to make its case. But that is a charade — people routinely use the Bible to validate political/cultural convictions (anti-gay, anti-whatever) they already had.

A book making the rounds tries to break the deadlock and explain the two sides to each other. Linguist George Lakoff, in Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, argues that left and right are really divided by clashing styles of moral thinking.

Conservatives, Lakoff suggests, embrace the Strict Father image of family life; liberals prefer the Nurturant (nurturing) Father image. These are two different styles of parenting, baseline preferences that unconsciously determine our outlook on life, government, faith. These two choices determine the destiny of everybody.

The Strict Father mode values strict commandments, obedience to hierarchy, self-discipline, self-denial, rewards and punishments. These values equip a person for surviving and thriving in a harsh capitalist world that rewards those who stay strong, competitive, self-reliant and obedient to fixed absolute truths.

The Nurturing Father mode says strict rules are less important than empathy and compassion. Nurturing builds character. A morally well-adjusted person is one who can function well in the interdependent world, where cooperation, kindness and trust are essential.

The idea extends to religious strife — Strict God vs. Nurturing God describes furious divisions among believers. The upshot: how you envision God explains how you view homosexuality, female ministers, environmentalism, even tax policy, the welfare state and modern art.

If true, then both sides in the Episcopal wars should together probe their unstated political biases and how they shape and distort personal assumptions about God. Then study Scripture anew, and see if the Bible takes on fresh power to convert them to a new position.

I witnessed a room full of Nashvillians doing this a decade ago — Christians, Jews and Muslims reading Genesis together after watching a Bill Moyers PBS special. Self-discovery flourished; friendships were made.

What would happen if Episcopal combatants agreed to an adventurous (Lenten) season of self-inspection, self-correction and self-discovery? I dont know. But the point is, neither do they.

The alternative is merely more of the same, an insufferable status quo of complacency, smugness, stalemate, meltdown.