The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1910-07-20
THE SIN OF PROFANITY
An Ugly Habit That rs Silly and Inc--
cusable.

something so wanton, So useless. go
brutal about it's irreverence as TO ex-
cite wonder at it's prevalence.
Drunkenness and lust and gamb-
ling have an explanation, though in
no sense any justification, in the per
version of strong natural appetite.
Theft and murder one can under
stand in view of mans love of money
or his resentment of wrongs done nv
fellowman. But what appetite Is
gratified by indulgence in profani-
ty?
The defense usually made that it
springs from violent temper and is
as uncomfortable as the passion that
lies behind it neither justifies nor
explains the offense. 1t does not JUS
tify, because it merely alleges one sin
as an excuse for a second, for a Sec
ond which is worse than the first. IL
does not explain, for anger against
man does not necessarily or natural
ly involve insolence toward God. Why
should His name be dishonored or
His holy attributes be used in a light
and contemptuous way, in order to
emphasize our dislike of the charac-
ter or conduct of men? No man
would justify his conduct in striking
an innocent and upoffending child.
simply as an incidental way of vent
ing his spleen upon some neighbor
whom he disliked and was disposed
to abuse. What would be the general
judgment upon one VINO, when angry
at man, spoke disrespectfully of a.
pure woman or dragged into the heat
of discussion her name in an insult
ing way? Far less excuse can be
made for the common, the sadly and
shamefully common sin, of feather
ing with prJIane words our shafts of
angry abuse. 1t is an insult to the
purity of God. 1t is an act of brazen
impudence that scorns and condemns
and defies His sovereign majesty. Men
guard with their lives the name of
their wife or mother, yet drag in the
dust of foul speech the name that is
above every name
And most profane speech has not
even the f1imsy and childish excuse Of
anger to justify or palliate its wick
edness. Too commonly it is indulged
In jest, as humorous way or adding
spice and flavor to the conversation.
This is SHINING in cold blood and
with malice aforethought, instead OF
in the heat if passion. 1t is mlrder
in the first degree, the murder of rev.
erence and loyal regard for Gad. The
man who DETAINED his wife or
daughter in an outburst of anger
could not be held so low and mex
cusable, basely wicked as the man
who sported in jest with the purity of
their name and used them as the
back ground or support of light and
base jokes. And swearers who gar
nish their speech with oaths, who
clothe themselves with cursing, not
as a garment but rather as an Drama
ment, hold high rank among the
fools who count it as a sport to do
mischief, among the scoffers who
have no fear or respect of God.
The excuse commonly made for
profanity is that it has become so ha-
bitual that the offenders swear un-
consciously. The plea is false. as is
shown by the fact that profane men
rarely forget themselves and swear In
the presence of a lady. 1t is an ac-
cepted rule in good society that no
gentleman will use an oath before
lady. The fact that habituaI swear
ers can and do remember and apply
this rule shows that they can refrain
II they will. And the plea also proves
the aggravated character of the Of
tense. No man is excused for muir
ded or theft or lying on the ground
that it has been so often INDUCED i'm
that 1t has become a second nature
Such plea can mean only thar the
more We sin the less we are guilty.
that if we indulge in sin until we
lose all self-control we may sin with
impunity and innocence. The reverse
is true. Men are responsible for their
wilful mutilation of their power OF
self-control. They cannot spit out
venom, and excuse themselves on the
ground that they had knowingly
swallowed it and could not refrain
They cannot cultivate an evil habit
and plead the fact in extenuation of
evil acts that result from the habit
To all pleas and excuses and apolo-
gies' there is one clear, complete.
and crushing answer: Thou shalt