The record-union., 1891-02-17
SUNDAY LAWS AND PUBLIC MORALS
Reasons for the Separation of Church
and State.

aEu Slttles
EDS. REcoRD-UN1oN: The article of
Rev. J. B. Silcox, in favor of Sunday
laws, proceeds upon the assumption that
| the functions of the State, church and
family are identical. He says: 'These
| three institutions of society are separately
and together responsible for public NOR
ais" This means that at certain points,
if not all, there should be union of
church and State. This is contrary to the
American principle of government,
which declares for a total separation of
these institutions.
The church should be purely volun-
tary affair. 1t should not use force. But
the State, by its very nature, does use
force. AS Washington says, ''The State
is not persuation, it is force.' The law
compels. The State cannot deal with
universal morality. 1t cannot deal with
| sin, but with crime. 1t can forbid and
punish the act of adultery, but not the
feeling that prompts it. This is for the
church to do. The moral power of the
church is far wider than that of the
State, because it is a voluntary institu-
ton. People belong to it because they
| want to, not because they must.
| The State is limited. 1t must be limited
because it is force. 1t can only, therefore,
deal with crime, that is, the forcible
| invasion of rights. 1t cannot deal with
| those immoralities which are purely per-
sonal, and are caAed vices-like gluttony,
ETC., or with the immoralities of the heart
and inward motive, with which religion
concerns itself. The State is for the de-
| Tense of individual rights, and Furnishes
the infringement of these rights. The
State is not paternal it is not father
over the people, but simply an instru-
mentality in the hands of the people for
+ iC mi lu va
in its action. 1t can forbid crime, but it
cannot legislate virtue into a man. Virtue
| is the result of choice, not of compulsion;
but the State in its very nature is COM
| pulsion.
1t is assumed that Sunday laws are for
public morals. 1 deny it. They are for
| the support Of theological morals-ike
church-going, etc.-but not for natural
| morals.
1 believe Sunday laws are injurious to
public morals. What is a greater curse
than idleness? 1t is idleness that makes
people Immoral. Why has crime in
creased in California for the last ten years?
laws, but because of the idleness, the en-
forced idlenesS, of so many people. They
could find no work. and drifted into
| crime.
What are Sunday laws, but laws for the
enforcement of idleness-to make men
more idle than they are. MIR. SIlcOX goes
upon the assumption that ''the hair of the
| dog will cure its bite" Idleness
among the people makes crime; there
| fore, let us have more idleness, say these
Sunday Lawmakers. Compel people to
be idle on Sunday; that will cure crime.
I deny it. Sunday laws will increase
crime, for they will increase idleness.
In behalf of public morals I condemn
these Sunday laws. Instead of increas-
ing idleness among the people, let the
State increase the chances of work among
! the people: give every man an oppor-
! tunity to do something to earn a living.
If the State will help people to work at
fair wages, that will decrease crime to a
vast extent. But to increase the idleness
of the community, as these Sunday laws
| do, is to increase crimes among the COM
munity.
| Sunday laws are entirely wrong. They
are special legislation and class legisla-
/ ton. What is wrong on Sunday, is al
ways wrong, and should always be for
| hidden. These Sunday laws infringe
upon natural rights, and under them
cruel prosecutions have existed in our
country; Christians have been sent to
prison, driven to exile, been deprived of
| homes and property.
Shall we repeat in the legislation of
| California the curse of a union of church
and State? SAMUEL p. PUTNAM,
| President of California Liberal Union.