We all agree that on character and values, we are best served by measuring a candidate by his or her actions, and not by his or her words. Politicians will say what they need to say to win elections. While a candidate’s policy statements on the issues of the day are very important, most Americans demand that a President possess good character and good values.     

We all agree that on race, Martin Luther King, Jr. provides us with the standard by which to judge one’s commitment to racial reconciliation: People should “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” This now fundamental American value provides us with the path to racial harmony and the opportunity to eliminate racism. 

We all agree that the citizens of this country place a very high value on the fight to rid our country of bigotry and racism, regardless of how we each perceive the degree of racism that exists in our country. We have seen the evils of racism and, therefore, demand zero tolerance of any individual or any group that engages in or supports racism. Without question, we all agree that our President must be a man or woman who would not sit idly by in the presence of racism, but instead show strength and integrity and, above all, action in the continuing fight against racism in all its pernicious forms.

On character, race and the fight against racism, let’s look at Obama’s relationship to Trinity United Church of Christ. Trinity United is a prominent black liberation church in Chicago with many prominent members. Barack Obama had a personal relationship with the pastor of this church and supported this church with his attendance, donations and more than 20 year membership.

Generally, Trinity United is a positive force for its community and, most assuredly, is comprised of decent, hard working and God loving Americans. There is, however, an aspect of this church’s identity, message and philosophy that has been left unexamined by far too many voters.

This is a Christian church where members stood and cheered when their pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, called the United States the “U.S.K.K.K. of America”. Reverend Wright preached to an agreeing congregation that “rich, white people” where going to keep Obama from the Presidency. On many occasions, Trinity United’s members and other Wright devotees celebrate Wright’s mocking, degrading and demonizing of a people by virtue of the color of their skin – white. 

Trinity United’s mission statement, displayed on its website and its brochure, promotes a “black value system” and advises its members to become “black Christian activists” and support the “black community” and “black family”. Trinity United boasts that it is “unashamedly black.”

The roots of Trinity United lie in the "black liberation theology" defined by 20th Century scholars such as James Cone, who regard blacks as the oppressed "chosen people" who are called to reject God if God fails to help blacks with their goal of destroying the "white enemy". Basically, the theological belief is that God is exclusively on the side of oppressed black people and Jesus was a black man charged with a mission to fight against the white oppressors.      

While Trinity United must be judged on its own merits as it projects itself into 21^st Century America, nothing that we have learned about this church suggests that it has moved very far beyond its origins.  Trinity United continues to empower and motivate its members by virtue of the color of their skin and the color of the skin of their “oppressors”. While the Bible and sincere worship are prominent in this church, Christ often serves as a back drop to a race-based crusade with the recurring theme of “us” against “them”.   

Can we agree that Trinity United’s race-based rhetoric and ideology is, indeed, racist, separatist and supremacist? Can we agree that fighting racism, separatism and supremacism with more of the same will not solve, but perpetuate more racism, separatism and supremacism?  Can we agree that this is not the type of church that we would attend and support or expect our President to attend and support?

Not there yet? Let’s look at it from a different perspective. What if Americans learn that Senator McCain has for 20 years secretly attended and supported a church like Trinity United, but whose members and pastor are white? Let’s say McCain belongs to Trinity Crusade Church of Christ.  McCain’s pastor, Reverend Wrong, tells his congregation that the reason this country is headed for ruin is because it is being dragged down by poor, black people. Reverend Wrong mocks, degrades and demonizes blacks and regularly blames blacks for the breakdown of American society. 

Reverend Wrong also endorses and promotes a white value system openly presented in the church’s literature and sermons. Trinity Crusade’s mission statement implores its members to become white Christian activists and support the white community and its white families. Trinity Crusade boasts that its members are “unashamedly white”.

Like Trinity United, Trinity Crusade finds its empowerment through the skin color of its members and, in part, at the expense of another people because of their skin color.  Like in Trinity United, members are taught to view the world and themselves in terms of race and racial hatred – a legacy that will be passed on to their children and their children’s children.  

Once McCain’s association with this church is made public, McCain leaves the church and denounces various controversial statements from his former pastor to avoid a backlash from voters. McCain, however, never acknowledges nor denounces the backward, race-based rhetoric and ideology maintained by his former church. He only rejects selected rants of his pastor, Reverend Wrong.

How would Americans of all races, creeds and ethnicities react to these revelations about McCain’s membership in this church? We can confidently predict the reaction. The vast majority of Americans would condemn Trinity Crusade and Reverend Wrong and liken it to the Ku Klux Klan. Virtually all Americans agree that there is no justification for anyone’s association with this church and condemn anyone’s continued support of this wayward pastor and the church’s racist, separatist and supremacist ideology.

Senator McCain is excoriated for his 20 year membership and inaction against Trinity Crusade. McCain is seen, without hesitation, as endorsing the ideas of his church and is condemned as a racist. In the presidential election, Obama wins in a landslide the likes of which America has never seen. Easy call … right? 

The undeniable truth is that Obama only denounced the rants of his pastor and eventually left his church for one reason alone – political expediency. He realized he was losing the support of voters of a different skin color – the very same people whom his pastor and church often stood against. With virtually unchallenged audacity, Obama sought the votes of people with different skin colors even though he never provided voters with assurances that he rejects the raced based message and tenets of his church.

To date, Senator Obama has not clearly and unequivocally rejected the racism, separatism and supremacism that exist at Trinity United. Instead, Obama proclaimed - "I will not denounce the church. It is not a church worthy of denouncing." – May 2008. And when the heat was on and Obama had to answer for Wright and Trinity United, Senator Obama delivered his inspiring “A More Perfect Union” speech that called for a dialogue on race. – March 2008. With sublime audacity, the Senator failed to begin the “dialogue” with an explanation of why he was a member of a racist church.      

Once we get beyond our infatuation with Obama and the exhilarating symbolism of an American with African ancestry so close to the Presidency, we must seriously and honestly think about Senator Obama’s relationship with Trinity United and ask: Are black racism, separatism and supremacism acceptable to Obama? By his action (or inaction), can we fairly conclude that Obama is, at least, tolerant of Trinity United’s race-based rhetoric and ideology? Does Obama believe that all whites, especially those in power, are racists and oppressors? As called for by Trinity United, is Obama’s allegiance first to African-Americans and then to the rest of Americans? What, indeed, does this man really believe about the American people whom he desires to govern and lead?

We all recall Senator Obama’s impassioned words from his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention: “There is not a black America, and a white America, and Latino America, and Asian America … there’s the United States of America!” Isn’t is puzzling to anyone that when Obama gave this inspiring speech the Senator was still a proud member of Trinity United Church of Christ where Wright’s raced-laced sermons still reverberated from the walls of Trinity United from years past? Again, what does this man really believe? 

What is really baffling is that with all these lingering questions many Americans, without hesitation, are excusing Obama’s choice of churches in the same way that they would, without hesitation, condemn McCain for choosing a church like the fictitious Trinity Crusade. Why are decent, thoughtful Americans so easily dismissing Obama’s relationship with Trinity United by saying, “Well, he’s only Obama’s pastor … Obama’s associations do not define the man.”

Why are decent, thoughtful Americans refusing to even acknowledge the different treatment of Obama’s membership in Trinity United versus McCain’s fictitious affiliation with Trinity Crusade Church of Christ? Why is there a double standard when judging Obama’s membership in Trinity United, and how do Americans justify their decision to excuse Obama?  

Certainly, no one really believes that Obama is such a dullard that he did not know what was going on at Trinity United. Obama claims he was not a witness to selected rants of Wright, but he admitted that he heard similar race-based preaching from Wright. In fact, Obama tells us in his book “Dreams of My Father” that he was fully aware of what Trinity United and Jeremiah Wright believed, including Trinity United’s roots in black liberation theology and its race driven agenda as advertised in Trinity’s mission statement and brochures. Nonetheless, Obama embraced the church along with his emerging identity as a black man in America. 

Certainly, no one really believes that Obama is excused because he is charming, intelligent, talented, thoughtful and charismatic. He, without doubt, can give a speech that is the envy of every orator. He’s a decent man, father and husband, and is very thoughtful on race and racial identity in America. And yet, while all of these traits are great attributes for a President, they cannot overcome a candidate’s serious character and values flaw, especially in matters of racism and racial reconciliation. 

Certainly, no one believes that Trinity United Church of Christ and Jeremiah Wright are allowed their bankrupt ideology just because the church is dominated by good people, ideas and values, and is also a positive force for its community. Lewis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, praised by Trinity United and Reverend Wright, also has good people, ideas and values, but the vast majority of Americans, regardless of their skin color, believe that Nation of Islam’s anti-Semitic and anti-White rhetoric along with Nation of Islam’s promotion of black separatism and supremacism constitute dangerous and backward beliefs.  Similarly, the fictitious Trinity Crusade church may also do many good things for its members and its community, but no fair-minded person would hesitate to describe this church as dangerous and backward.  

Certainly, no one thinks that Trinity United is justified in its ideology because African – Americans are a minority in a country that continues to engage in racism. This is not a numbers game where a racial minority is entitled to embrace racism because their group is smaller in number than other groups with different skin colors. This cannot be a formula for success. We are supposed be joining together to fight racism, not picking teams based on skin color. Again … racism, separatism and supremacism are not the cure for racism, separatism and supremacism. 

Could a candidate’s serious failure on race be excused because of a voter’s political bias? Whether a voter’s passion is for Obama’s message of hope and change, or a voter’s deeply felt conviction that the Republicans must be ousted from the White House, or both; can a voter allow himself or herself to vilify McCain for his fictitious membership in Trinity Crusade Church of Christ, but then excuse Obama for the same transgression at Trinity United Church of Christ?  Or a better example: What if Hillary Clinton was the Democrat’s nominee and was found to secretly belong to a church like the fictitious Trinity Crusade Church of Christ? Once found out, voters (even lifetime Democrats and others who detest Bush and the Republicans) would begrudgingly stay home or vote for someone other than Senator Clinton. For, how could a voter, especially one who champions Dr. King’s call to judge people on character and not skin color, turn his or her back on Dr. King’s formula for racial reconciliation by voting for someone who belonged to and supported a church that was the antithesis of Dr. King’s prized principle?       

So, what are we left with as we approach the November election? Well, many of those intending to vote for Barack Obama are oblivious to the serious implications of the Obama, Reverend Wright and Trinity United relationship, and will remain forever oblivious. Perhaps, deep down, they fear that an honest examination may leave them with no choice but to sit out this election. To these voters, ignoring this important issue comes at a price. For as Dr. King said: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter”.   Supporting, encouraging or condoning racism, separatism and supremacism are things that matter. 

What about those thoughtful and decent Americans who have actually examined Obama’s relationship with Trinity United, and have nonetheless excused Obama for his choice of churches? What can be their justification for Obama’s association with Trinity United and Reverend Wright?

The sad and disheartening answer is that many voters excuse Barack Obama for his inaction because of the color of his skin.  What other reason can there be if a white Democrat or Republican would lose the Presidency in a landslide if they belonged to the same type of church?

For too many voters, Obama did nothing wrong. They believe Reverend Wright is right about his people’s “oppressors”; and that black Americans, and frankly all Americans, are entitled to make sweeping, divisive racism charges against whites in America. Hating and blaming whites is justified because they believe all or most whites are racists and, since they occupy the vast majority of positions of power, are properly their sworn enemies. These voters believe that Dr. King’s powerful colorblind formula for racial reconciliation is only applicable to whites, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans and others. Until the racists are reformed or removed from power, these voters believe that judging people based on the color of their skin is entirely justified. 

Their only hesitation concerning Obama’s membership in Trinity United Church of Christ may be whether Obama is truly “black enough.” Yet, these same voters would march in the streets with cries of “no justice, no peace” and with demands for withdrawal from the Presidential race the moment the fictitious McCain or Clinton/Trinity Crusade relationship was made known to the electorate.    

For too many voters, racial guilt (commonly known as “white guilt”) and the desire to be viewed as purged of historical racism, has moved these voters to excuse Obama’s failure on race even though they would otherwise vehemently condemn Senators McCain or Clinton if they belong to the same type of church.  These voters give Obama a pass on this fundamental fairness and equality issue because Obama is an African-American.

The quest to feel absolved of past racial abominations and present racial inequities allows these voters to overlook or condone their candidate’s historic duplicity: Vote for me, even though I belonged to a church that frequently rails against you because of your skin color, and even though I and my fellow church members are empowered and motivated by our own skin color. 

This well intentioned drive for racial acceptance is not just hypocritical and ironic; it is absurdly dangerous and, frankly, moronic. Racial guilt has become so warped that Americans will excuse someone’s support of a backward, raced based church rooted in racism, separatism and supremacism for fear of being called … racists, separatists and supremacists.

Wouldn’t we, as Americans looking forward to the day of racial harmony, do more good for Dr. King’s cause by calling Obama out to answer for his poor judgment, and demand that he denounce that aspect of Trinity United that is unacceptable to any American serious about the fight to end racism? Isn’t this how equals treat equals when they are found wanting in character and values? Isn’t this the real demonstration of respect for the Senator?

Think about the implications of your vote for Barack Obama. By your vote, you have excused the Senator for sitting idly by in the face of racism, separatism and supremacism, when you would not similarly excuse McCain or Clinton for their membership in the fictitious Trinity Crusade Church of Christ. By your vote, you have set a double standard by which you reveal that you expect less from Obama than you would from McCain or Clinton because of the color of Obama’s skin. You have a zero tolerance for someone’s failure on race; except, of course, when the possible future President of the United States is an African American. 

When Dr. King envisioned the “day when … little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers”, we hope he did not envision those children going their separate ways on Sunday to Trinity United or Trinity Crusade where their white, black (or Asian, Latino, etc.) sisters and brothers would be accosted by words of racial divisiveness and hatred from their church leaders.    

Americans should pause and honestly think about Obama’s failure on race because it may reveal a disqualifying character and values flaw. If voters want to make a statement about equality, fairness and racial harmony, voters may want to reconsider their vote this November. Or, was Martin Luther King, Jr. wrong about judging one by his or her character and not his or her skin color? Were his enlightened words only applicable to whites, Latinos, Asians and every other race and ethnicity that make up America, but not applicable to black Americans?

Think about it … talk about it. Then, expect the lame excuses or justifications to bombard you from those who continue to overlook Obama’s relationship with Trinity United Church of Christ. Eventually, your better judgment may prevail and you may pause and say – “What was I thinking?” Or as one enlightened citizen stated: "He would not have been my pastor. You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend ... hate speech [is] unacceptable in any setting ... I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving.” – Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.