p. 8 | A KIND OF “EQUALITY.” by Editor

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Nov 6, 1901

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 27, No. 45.

A KIND OF “EQUALITY.”

By Editor

It Makes a Difference.

It is said that the Puritans believed in religious liberty—for the Puritans. The Catholic Church believes in religious liberty for the true religion, which of course she feels that she pre-eminently possesses. A good illustration of how politicians and latter-day reformers look upon the “equality” of classes is furnished by the present candidate for Mayor of San Francisco by the Union Labor party. The gentleman says:—

I am not in favor of dividing the people into classes. I am not in favor of arraying one element against another. I am not in favor of making political distinctions based on wealth, religion, or social station in life. I believe in equal representation for employer and employe, for capital as well as for labor, and equal protection for all. If elected, I pledge myself honestly and fairly to give equal consideration and to show neither favoritism nor prejudice for or against any element or class.

And the same gentleman shows what he means by this by counting all of labor that is worthy of consideration as organized labor. He says again:—

I deprecate violence, am in favor of peaceful measures at all hazards, and believe in the fair and friendly consideration of invested capital, as correlative to similar consideration for organized labor. I am also in thorough sympathy with the provision that, where practicable, all public supplies shall bear the Union Label.

Now organized labor is not the only labor worthy of consideration. There are more men in California, it is said, outside of unions than belong to unions. Are not these worthy of consideration? Why should public goods bear a “union label”? Are not non-unionists a part of the public? Is a man a whit better because he belongs to a union? Is not a man just as worthy who does not belong to any union? Is not the work of an American who belongs to no union as worthy of support as the equal work of another American who may belong to a union? Is not this attitude of the candidate above mentioned just the very thing which will divide classes and emphasize present differences? The gentleman believes in the equal protection of all—union laborers. This is the exact parallel of the religious liberty granted by the Puritans.

Now we are not at all interested in the coming municipal election of San Francisco. The gentleman referred to may make as good a mayor or better than his opponents. We do not know as to that. We are pointing out in this the erroneous conception of liberty and equality which obtains in so many circles, and which is constantly demanding legislation to favor some class. True liberty is the liberty of the other man who may not agree with us. True Christian liberty is the right of the other man to speak and think and act for himself in opposition to what I may think and speak and do, to the same extent, and on the same equality, which I demand for myself. Men may prate of liberty and equality; but unless this is held with equal respect for the other man, it is not liberty. That is not genuine Christianity which does not recognize this, whatever may be its claims.