RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Mar 19, 1896

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 22, No. 12.

“RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE.”

THE following editorial article, under the above head, from the Woodland (Cal.) Daily Democrat, the editor of which we understand is a Roman Catholic, speaks for itself. Its principles have a genuine American (old-time) ring:—

A day or so ago we made reference to the coming to this country of Dr. Ahlwardt, the Jew baiter, at the same time deprecating the attempts he will make to arouse race prejudices and stir up religious intolerances.

In a country like ours, and a day and age so enlightened, it is inexplicable that an attempt to interfere with religious freedom should make any headway.

Our forefathers came to this country to escape from the hate, tyranny, and persecution of religious bigotry. It is astounding that their descendants will permit persecution for no other offense than that people claim the right to worship God in their own way.

The Jews are not the only victims of the spirit of intolerance and bigotry that seems to be gaining ground all over the United States. There are states in the Union where Seventh-day Adventists are thrown into prison and subjected to all manner of insults, humiliations, and inconveniences because they choose to observe the Mosaic Sabbath as a day of rest and to work on the first day of the week.

Even in localities where such puritanical laws are enforced, it is not pretended that the Adventists are not quiet, unostentatious, orderly, sober, and industrious. It is not even denied that they refrain from all kinds of unnecessary secular labor on the seventh day, and keep it sacred to religious duties and divine worship.

To imprison them under such circumstances is nothing short of punishment for conscience’s sake, and that is abhorrent to the principles of religious freedom upon which our form of government is founded.

There are many well-meaning people who hold that the Adventists have nobody to blame but themselves. They contend that it is the law of the land and should be enforced, and if Adventists do not like it, they have the privilege of going where such laws do not prevail. It may be the law of states, but it is law without constitutional authority, for our organic law guarantees to every man, woman, and child the right to worship God according to the dictates of conscience.

Let us suppose that the Adventists were numerically strong enough to enact laws forbidding secular

labor on Saturday. There is not a Christian in the United States who would not protest that such laws would be tyrannical, intolerant, unjust, fit only for criminals, and degrading to citizens of a free country.

It is absurd to present the alternative of observing such puritanical laws or removing to a country where there is more respect for civil and religious liberty. These people settle here, raise families, and build homes for themselves under a constitutional guarantee that they will have the liberty of worshiping God in whatever manner they choose. That they are in a minority is no reason why they should be denied that right.

If they were vicious, disorderly, malicious, or defiant in their violation of state laws that try to control their conscience, there might be some show of reason for such intolerance. In all other respects they are law-abiding, peaceable, industrious, moral, and order-loving people, and any law which will throw them into prison for an honest difference of opinion concerning which is the proper day to observe as a day of rest, is but little less than a relic of medieval barbarism.

These strictures apply with equal force to all other forms of bigotry and religious persecution and intolerance.