Trinity United Church of Christ: Obama's Home Church

Much debate surrounds the "faith" of presidential candidate Barrack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois. The media is continually trying to understand the profession of faith that this liberal senator made some years ago at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Christian conservatives are skeptical about Obama's "faith." Most liberals are clueless, since they are very uncomfortable with serious Christian profession and practice by any public figure. Senator Obama does not fit with the comfortable stereotypes of our time thus few know how to evaluate him or the church he is a member of in Chicago.

I have never met Obama or his pastor, the well-known Dr. Jeremiah Wright. I do know a few people, both in politics and theology, that I trust who know both Obama and Wright. I have also carefully read both of Obama's books. Long before Obama became our senator I watched and followed Jeremiah Wright for some time. Here is my own impression, if it is worth much to readers.

First, Barrack Obama was clearly an unbeliever in his early life. He had no religious training and no spiritual interest, at least of the Christian type. At a definite point in his life this all clearly changed. Conservatives have every reason to oppose Obama's political views. But his personal faith should not become an issue that impacts his campaign any more than Hillary Clinton's Methodism should be an issue to her campaign.

President George W. Bush appears to have a deep and personal faith but this, in itself, does not make him either a great or a terrible president. The Christian Right would often have us believe otherwise but this is not rocket science folks. I am sometimes led to believe that President Bush's faith might even impact some decisions adversely. At other times I am glad to know that we have a man of prayer and personal faith leading us. In the end, this is not why I support or oppose a candidate or a leader's decisions and policies. This confusion of "personal faith" (which I wrote about yesterday) with political realities and expressed positions is, generally speaking, a huge mistake. We are not selecting pastors to lead the nation, but people who can best lead us in our government. 

Second, Barrack Obama strikes me as a man of true faith, at least from all that I have read and heard from people who know him. He sees his various positions on issues as an extension of that personal faith. I disagree with some of his interpretations regarding ethical issues and sincerely believe he could be better informed by biblical and historically Christian thought. But he is a man who openly professes faith in Christ, takes the church and the sacraments seriously, and practices his faith in a credible way. He is also a committed American and the reports from some in the Right about Muslim influences hindering his effectiveness as a leader are simply slanderous. Is he wrong in some of his views and how he relates them to his faith? I am quite convinced that he is wrong in several important cases. Again, and this is important to note: This is not, however, how we should evaluate him or his Republican counterparts. I will vote for a non-Christian in a heartbeat if I think she/he is the best person to lead this country. I will also make this decision with prayer and careful thought but "voting for the person who wins at proving to the Christian Right that she/he is one of us" is a non-issue so far as I am concerned. This, again, is a part of the problem with James Dobson's recent comments about Fred Thompson.

Third, Jeremiah Wright is a deeply impressive minister of the Christian faith. Trinity United Church of Christ does not fit into the stereotypical categories of "conservative" or "liberal." It was at Trinity Church, of course, where Obama was converted to faith and entered the Christian church publicly as an adult. And this much is very sure---Obama did not convert for any political gain since he was not in the public eye when he made his decision to profess personal faith. There is, in other words, no evidence that he is "using" his faith as a political wedge. (This, in itself, is very refreshing frankly.)

The subject of Trinity Church, and the Obama buzz, prompted Martin Marty to write a "Sightings" column this week (April 2) about Dr. Jeremiah Wright and his congregation. Martin Marty and I know one another and we have had serious conversations on several occasions. We do not always agree on issues, especially political and social issues, but his evaluations are generally fair and even-handed, even if they reflect his more liberal views. He is a scholar first, not a partisan for Obama. Marty has visited Trinity and wrote his column yesterday in order to make "comment" on what he knows. He definitely got my attention.

Trinity is the largest congregation in the UCC denomination. It's rubric is: "Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian." Marty writes: "Trinity's rubric shapes a kind of ellipse around these two 'centers,' neither of which makes sense without the other. This you would never know from the slanders of its enemies or the incomprehension and naivete of some reporters who lack background in the civil rights and African-American movements of several decades ago---a background out of which Trinity's stirrings first rose and on which it transformatively trades."

Trinity is "Africentric" and operates ecumenically within the heritage of the idea that "black is beautiful." Despite what people say this 8,000 member church brings together the disadvantaged and the middle class, along with a handful of real movers and shakers in the city of Chicago. If you live in the Chicago region you can watch Trinity's services and Jeremiah Wright on television. You will quickly discover that this church is not cultic or sectarian in any meaningful sense. Wright, in point of fact, preaches the biblical text quite powerfully. Marty suggests that at times he sounds "almost literalist about biblical texts when he preaches" the Bible. I would agree. The congregation is given large-print texts from Scripture so they can follow his sermons. He regularly preaches the good news of Christ. Marty adds, "He can be abrasive." Why? Because he resists the "shame" that he finds in the black community rooted in the legacies of segregation and racism. Marty adds, "Trinity reorients."

Oppose Obama if you will, but do it for the right reasons. And do not believe the lies that you hear about the man or his pastor. Seeking to undo his profession of faith and his personal integrity is raw politics. It is beneath the spirit of biblical Christianity, the kind of Christianity that treats personal profession and the story of adult conversion seriously. I pray for Barrack Obama. He actually offers a refreshing perspective for new discussion in this country. His record is slim and his views should be openly critiqued. I do not agree with his political positions on many social and economic issues, as I previously noted, but I refuse to attack him personally or his personal profession of faith. This approach is not only counter-productive, it clearly doesn't have the spirit of Christ about it. Maybe we can begin to resist this kind of rhetoric that flows from the Christian Right by actually having an honest debate about the types of political issues that are important to this nation and not about the personal faith of the candidates. One can at least hope for such a change, even if some in the Christian Right continue to promote the the destructive politics of personal slander.

Comments

[Izzy Dylan]

I think we should oppose Barack for his blatant hypocrisy & political opportunism, showing his real colors. This past week he managed to call for Don Imus to be fired for referring to the Rutgers Basketball team as "nappy headed hos", but saw no problem meeting up with Ludacris who has a song called "hos in my room", another song called "ho", and constant references to nigga in his music, which I am sure the Rutgers women have bounced their head to a couple of times. Maybe next week he can meet with Nappy Roots and round out the hypocrisy.

[John H. Armstrong]

Izzy,

If you are looking for a candidate who avoids opportunism you may have to forget upcoming elections. It is a universally present reality, or so it seems to me.

Obama should be supported, or opposed, on "issues" more substantial than the Imus affair, which is pretty disgusting all the way around.

[Izzy Dylan]

In the "url" I put a link where Obama compares Imus to some of the rappers, although quite a bit more temperate than calling for someone to lose their livelihood, but glad to see him actually say something. Too bad he doesn't have the hutzpa of Bill Cosby.

[Dino Topic]

It's all US needs for a nexta president: a muslim infiltrator posing as christian attending separatist black church

[Janis Twilley]

Sorry. Cannot agree at all. I understand about the separation of church and state and all of that, but I was married to a muslim for over 6 years. I will never vote for a man with a muslim name to run my United States of America. If he wanted to be Commander and Chief of America he should have changed it.
And that really has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with loyalty to this country.
Janis

[Crow]

If you look at the front page of this church's web site, http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
it shows a full commitment to Africa and none to our country. That's a little alarming.

Also, his middle name Hussein is not the problem, but the fact that he was partially raised as a muslim including a several year stink in a muslim madrasa of the wahhabi (read: radical) kind during his early years (read: very impressionable and brainwashable).

Some things are not always as they seem. If you were young, and wanted to be president since the 3rd grade (like Obama) and were a muslim infiltrator, of course you would attend church, profess faith, get off drugs, and then get elected to the senate and preach a populist message that you're only interested in what's best for this country.

Has Arnold Schwarznegger ever convinced you that he could take on 5 grown men with his own bare hands?

It's all acting. Politicians= actors, plain and simple. Some are better than others. Hillary can't hide the fact that she's an angry, venomous, feminist commie, but she does try.

Obama does seem like a nice guy, but they're not always like they seem. I don't trust him at all.

[Lsmith]

I am sorry to say that I feel there is something very wrong. With Mr Obama being our president. I am praying that americans will wake up befor it is to late. This is not about racer I am a christian. I don't see color I see the person.

[George Walter]

Would you be so charitable to Mitt Romney, a professed "Christian" who lives a Christian life, but it is not a popular brand of Christianity called Mormonism. Ministers all over the country are opposing him based on his religion, not issues. Curious if we are being a little too hypocritical in this matter.

[Dar]

I too agree that America, and certainly the media have not vetted Obama. Please please take a look at www.tucc.org. After you get beyond the outline of Africa in the intro and the african drum beats, read About Us. This Chruch wants reparations!!! do you think Obama will pass legislation to give all blacks $$$$ for having an ancestor that was a slave?

[Zoie]

Do you have to be black to be a part of this church? I would not vote for a president that would segregate himself according to his race.

[John H. Armstrong]

One thing is certain by all of these comments on a blog I wrote in April of last year. Senator Obama is "hot" and people are taking notice of him now that he has a real chance of being the nominee of the Democractic Party. I find all of this expression of angst and passion more than interesting.

First, read my blog again. I did not in any way endorse Obama. I appealed to the simple fact that he is an active member of a Christian Church and professes conversion to personal faith in Christ. I do not know if he is a "real" Christian and neither do any of you who react against him. I do know what he has written and spoken about faith. I find his words about the place of faith in his life compelling and a great deal of his political philosophy anything but compelling.

Second, the fact that Obama had a Muslim father means nothing. His dad was not a part of his life and moral formation and really was an atheist if you read the story. And Obama's training by Muslims had no real influence upon his life or practice, ever. This is truly a "bogey-man" and only plays into giving him false support for the myths it stirs up in the media.

Third, Trinity UCC is a unique place with a very "Afro-centric" message. (Yes, there are more than a few white members at Trinity from what I am told but it is located in a very black neighborhood in Chicago.) What I actually wrote was that I have heard the pastor preach the gospel. I did not endorse every aspect of the church at all. The UCC is problematic enough for many reasons too numerous to list here. I personally work with a few orthodox UCC congregations but they are a small minority in this mainline denomination to say the least.

Fourth, if people do not want Obama to be the next president then much better arguments than those left at this blog will be needed. The man appeals to people under forty for a number of substantial reasons that many conservatives do not seem to understand at all, which will spell defeat for them if they think this way in November. Obama is a formidable person regardless of whether you like him or not. That was part of the reason I wrote what I did in April and even before.

I think Obama's social views are clearly liberal but his message is both populist and mainstream in other ways. I am hopeful a serious contender will face him (I am assuming he wins the nomination which I thought he would even nine months ago) and bring real issues to the table before the general election in November.

Oppose him if you will but do not make up stories or look for conspiracies. The man is a decent, honest human being from everything we can see and know. I happen to believe his political time may have come but I also hope we will get an honest debate going once we know who his opponent will be. I will listen and pray. I will urge you to do the same.

One thing Obama has right is that he is not running as "a Christian" because he has the best faith but rather as a civil servant elected by the people of Illinois to the Senate. Ministers and Christians would do well to keep this in mind.

[shoulders of orion]

let's take a stab at shedding some light on crow's charge that Obama was schooled in a madrasa.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_barack_obama_muslim.htm

Did Obama's mother go on to marry another Muslim named Lolo Soetoro who "educated his stepson as a good Muslim by enrolling him in one of Jakarta's Wahabbi schools?"

Yes and no. When Obama's mother remarried, it was indeed to an Indonesian man named Lolo Soetoro, whom his stepson describes as a "non-practicing" Muslim. But it was his "secular" mother who supervised his education, Obama has written, sending him to both Catholic and Muslim primary schools after the family moved to Jakarta. There is nothing on record to indicate Obama attended a madrassa (Muslim religious school) run by Wahabbists, and in any case it's unlikely his mother would have chosen to expose him to such an extreme form of Islam given her stated abhorrence of religious closed-mindedness and her stated goal of giving him a well-rounded education, including in matters of faith.

Update: CNN has tracked down the school in question, the Basuki School in Jakarta, which a deputy headmaster described as a "public school" with no particular religious agenda. "In our daily lives, we try to respect religion, but we don't give preferential treatment," he told CNN. A classmate of Obama's described the school as "general," with students of many religious backgrounds attending. Obama entered the school at the age of 8 and attended for two years.

[John H. Armstrong]

Thanks for this helpful and correct information about Barack Obama's schooling. The urban legends and conspiracies are completely ridiculous and very unproductive in terms of the debate we need to conduct, as I have argued. The comments above demonstrate where you can go to discover the truth about these false tales about Obama's schooling, faith and practice.

Now, I believe there is much more to think about in terms of Obama's "blackness." (By "blackness" I am referring here to his own experience of identity.) This "blackness" is used to frame, or not frame, his views on many important matters. What this all means for politics and why his "Afro-centric" UCC congregation and pastor have a huge impact upon how Senator Obama perceives himself is a real story to be discussed. Steele gives you the insight to think about this and about the dangers of an increase of "victimization" in the struggle about race in this country.

I have come to understand this story more clearly this evening by reading the new book, A Bound Man (Free Press, New York, NY, 2008), by the respected black author Shelby Steele, one of the most articulate voices in America about the problem of "black identity" politics. I will write more about Steele's views of Obama in the coming days. I urge serious readers to take a look at this short book of only 142 pages. It needs to be discussed now more than ever since Obama, as I have noted, will likely become his party's nominee soon.

Who really is Barack Obama? How should we understand the man and his sense of self? Steele is the first to explore this in any depth (Steele also had a black father and a white mother just as Obama). His reflection on race and Obama makes a lot of sense to me personally.

[BobH]

I am VERY skeptical about supporting someone who swears allegiance to a church whose fundamental principals is "A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA." (see http://www.tucc.org/about.htm)

Don't you think they would crucify a Republican if he/she had such allegiance?

Bob

[John H. Armstrong]

Trinity UCC is a "black" church, as I have clearly noted. It defines blackness as a very important quality for self-understanding. I believe this approach is wrong and that it actually harms black people in the long run. It is also inconsistent with the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr., who wanted us to be neither "black" or "white" but people who were colorblind. The civil rights movement's original vision has changed radically. The real question for Obama will be what vision he has for America and the role that black and white will have in our future. Will we pursue the goal of becoming one people or will we pursue the "blackness" agenda of the more recent civil rights leaders such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? Obama has not yet made it clear what he thinks but his book about his dream of knowing his father reveals a "black" vision that is not one with the vision of MLK.

[K R Brahmer]

Bottom line: Obama is and has been a member of a church which advocates blacks "stay black" and favors African origins as a matter of civic interest.
Some of the agenda expressed by the UTCC does indicate a degree of prejudice. A Snopes article includes counter argument that such Afro-American favoritism is no different than Irish-Americans or Italian-Americans. An interesting point to consider is that it is a poor comparison and would better be expressed as European-Americans because Africa is a continent of many nations with as many or more cultures/languages/etc.

But compare this concern with other candidates' religious background...do any of the "white" candidates acknowledge membership in a church which excludes blacks or advocates a sole interest in white Americans? Also Obama's membership is not a sudden conversion for the sake of political advantage since he has been a member for 20 years.

Frankly, even considering a racial aspect is to hide what we should examine. IF OBAMA WERE WHITE, would there be such interest in his candidacy? Suppose Richardson belonged to a church that similarly advocated things Spanish and a commitment to that heritage?
If change (the political cry of the moment is change) is his advocated agenda - exactly what changes does that include?
This is no different than consideration of a candidate who is female...if you can imagine Clinton belonging to a church that advocates European/white origins as a prime consideration.

The emperor's clothes comes to mind. A woman candidate is just that - a woman. A black candidate is black. Acknowledge those facts and get on to an examination of their ability to perform as our leader considering the entire range of characteristics desired.

[fran bruce]

thank you for your educated objectivity about this man..we need all of it we can get for the days ahead..fnb

[ColtsFan]

I am choosing not to comment on Obama's church membership or his personal faith. My comment is intended to only comment on his pro-abortion position, which I was very surprised to discover.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=/Commentary/archive/200801/COM20080109b.html

Obama Is the Most Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever
By Terence P. Jeffrey
CNSNews.com Editor in Chief
January 09, 2008

Barack Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate ever.

He is so pro-abortion that he refused as an Illinois state senator to support legislation to protect babies who survived late-term abortions because he did not want to concede -- as he explained in a cold-blooded speech on the Illinois Senate floor -- that these babies, fully outside their mothers' wombs, with their hearts beating and lungs heaving, were in fact "persons."

"Persons," of course, are guaranteed equal protection of the law under the 14th Amendment.

In 2004, U.S. Senate-candidate Obama mischaracterized his opposition to this legislation. Now, as a presidential frontrunner, he should be held accountable for what he actually said and did about the Born Alive Infants Bill.

State and federal versions of this bill became an issue earlier this decade because of "induced labor abortion." This is usually performed on a baby with Down's Syndrome or another problem discovered on the cusp of viability. A doctor medicates the mother to cause premature labor. Babies surviving labor are left untreated to die.

Jill Stanek, who was a nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., testified in the U.S. Congress in 2000 and 2001 about how "induced labor abortions" were handled at her hospital.

"One night," she said in testimony entered into the Congressional Record, "a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have the time to hold him. I couldn't bear the thought of this suffering child lying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."

In 2001, Illinois state Sen. Patrick O'Malley introduced three bills to help such babies. One required a second physician to be present at the abortion to determine if a surviving baby was viable. Another gave the parents or a public guardian the right to sue to protect the baby's rights. A third, almost identical to the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act President Bush signed in 2002, simply said a "homo sapiens" wholly emerged from his mother with a "beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord or definite movement of voluntary muscles" should be treated as a "'person,' 'human being,' 'child' and 'individual.'"

Stanek testified about these bills in the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, where Obama served. She told me this week he was "unfazed" by her story of holding the baby who survived an induced labor abortion.

On the Illinois Senate floor, Obama was the only senator to speak against the baby-protecting bills. He voted "present" on each, effectively the same as a "no."

"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute."

That June, the U.S. Senate voted 98-0 in favor of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (although it failed to become law that year). Pro-abortion Democrats supported it because this language was added: "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section."

Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer explained that with this language the "amendment certainly does not attack Roe v. Wade."

On July 18, 2002, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called for the bill to be approved by unanimous consent. It was.

That same year, the Illinois version of the bill came up again. Obama voted "no."

In 2003, Democrats took control of the Illinois Senate. Obama became chairman of the Health and Human Services committee. The Born Alive Infant bill, now sponsored by Sen. Richard Winkel, was referred to this committee. Winkel also sponsored an amendment to make the Illinois bill identical to the federal law, adding -- word for word -- the language Barbara Boxer said protected Roe v. Wade. Obama still held the bill hostage in his committee, never calling a vote so it could be sent to the full senate.

A year later, when Republican U.S. senate candidate Alan Keyes challenged Obama in a debate for his opposition to the Born Alive Infant Bill, Obama said: "At the federal level there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe v. Wade. I would have voted for that bill."

In fact, Obama had personally killed exactly that bill.

(Terry Jeffrey is the editor in chief of CNSNews.com.)

[Craig]

Thank you for the information about Obama's church. I like him as a candidate but I wanted to here from someone who is familiar with the church he attends. It's difficult to wade through the spin and your commentary and expertise is welcome

[Robert]

Race And Religion

I am a 52-year-old African American male who has always known that I am “black” as defined by the American laws and social “norms.” I grew up in the heart of Mississippi where strict segregation laws were strictly enforced. The most poignant memories of segregation were riding the yellow, Bluebird school bus each day. I lived twenty miles from the nearest school. My bus would make a long circular route each morning and pick up other students from grades 1-12. All the students on my bus were black. We all went to a black campus with three sections; 1-6, 7-9 and 9-12. There was also a white school bus and a white campus across the way that divided the two schools with a highway in the middle.

Each morning as we were riding to school, the white school bus would always pass the black school bus. The black school bus had its accelerator set at a limited speed while the white school bus could go as fast as the driver desired. For the first four years of my early childhood schooling I saw this happening on a daily basis. Then one day the driver of my school bus decided to remove the accelerator control. That day when the white school bus tried to pass us, the driver put the “pedal to the metal” and sped past the white school bus. And so it has been with race in America.

African Americans have only recently defined themselves as African Americans within the last twenty years. We did not have the right that European Americans had to define themselves for four hundred years. Now it seems that many Americans of Euro-Judeo-Christian descent want to keep the accelerator controls on the bus and keep African Americans segregated in a narrowly confined definition of blackness. We are a very diverse group. The one thing that is most common about us is the color of our skin and the experiences that color has brought about. Most African Americans have experienced some form of racism in their lifetime. What makes us unique is our ability to transcend race and remove the fetters that have slowed us down. Regardless of religion, political ideology or cultural values, African Americans must continue to move forward in defining themselves in this multi-ethnic landscape that we call America.
BlueFalcon96

[Reyn]

Thank you for this article. Though a Leftist myself (and an Obama supporter) I am also a mainstream (left even of the UCC) Christian -- and I am European-American from a family that has been here over 300 years.

I have found the conspiracy theories and attacks on Obama as a "Muslim" to be absolutely unbelievable. I thought we were better than that as a people -- and honestly, I had more respect for the Right than many of their members have seemed to deserve on this issue. The author and some of the participants in this discussion renew my faith through this article and their comments however.

Thank you.

[jesus b.]

I think we should be very careful and honest in chosing who would be the next president in our country, not being influenced by partisan preferences and emotions, but rather with deligent and serious study of their personal background in which commonly influence and dominates their personal views and decisions and and that in the long run will direct our future. Let us make our decision very seriously that will not bring us misery and for the next generation. Please considere in your decision our freedom and right (not the perverse "pseudo-freedom and right"), our economy (everything goes up but our income), the unity of all people of any color and religion in the United States of America, and most of all our security. Our future primarily depends on us, and that is our duty and responsibility. Thank you.

[Murtad]

Racism and bigotry in blatant form.

[Diana Knowles]

I have to admit that I once considered not voting for Obama because of his muslim name, but having studied all of the opponents, I feel hes the best man for the job. He's confident, he's spiritual, which matters to me, he's pro choice, he's motivating and I truly believe he can bring this country together. I do however fear what black america will expect of their first black president. I wasn't around during slavery, I have been a target of sexism so I understand being a target, but I dont believe we should still be seeking revenge against ignorance. There are still haters out there, ignorant because of how they were brought up, and I believe that their crimes will be brought to justice somehow, someway. I do not believe that a black president will hurt this country. I believe the only hurt this country will suffer is from the hate and ignorance within. I am a white, catholic raised, female american with french and indian heritage. I support Obama for the 2008 election and I believe he has the professionalism to carry this nation back to greatness and out of the shame shackles we've gotten ourselves into.

[John H. Armstrong]

Several of the above comments, from different readers with sympathy for Obama, have made some insightful contributions. Thank you. White European Americans need to "listen" and since we still have the "power" in this culture we have a hard time doing it very well. I welcome the clarity that Obama brings on several of these issues while I do not endorse him at the same time.

My fondest wish is for an honest debate between two good candidates. I long for the Democrats to become "pro-life" and I long for Republicans to better reflect the good angels of our American history. Since the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 the Republican Party became the "default" party of the old Dixiecrats of the Democrat Party of my Southern childhood.

America's original systemic sin is still racism and we are a long way from resolving it.