The coastland times. [volume] (Mnateo [i.e. Manteo], N.C.) 1947-1959, 1958-11-28

there has been frequent mention of
the equality of man as broad So
cial objective. No proposition in re-
cent years has been clouded by
more loose thinking. Not many of
us would care to enter a poetry
contest with Keats, nor play chess
with the national champion, nor
set our character beside Albert
Schweitzer's. When we see the doc
trine of equality contradicted
everywhere around US in fact, it
remains a mystery why so many
of us continue to give it lip serv-
ice in theory, and why we tolerate
the vicious notion that status in
any field need not be earned.
Pin down the man who uses the
word Equality" and at once the
evasions and qualifications begin.
AS l recall, you, yourself, in a
recent statement used some phrase
to the effect that men were "equal
in the sight of God" would be
interested to know where in the
Bible you get your authority for
this conception. There is doubt
less authority in Scripture for the
concept of potential equality in the
sight of God-after earning that
status, and with various further
qualifications-but where is the
authority for the sort of ipso facto
equality suggested by your con-
text? The whole idea contradicts
the basic tenet of the Christian
and Jewish religions that status is
earned through righteousness and
is not an automatic matter. What
is true of religion and righteous
ness is just as true of achievement
in other fields. And what is true
among individuals is just as true
of averages among races.
The confusion here is not unlike
the confusion created by some left
wing writers between the doctrine
of equality and the doctrine of
Christian Love. The command to
love your neighbor is not COM
mand either to consider your
neighbor your equal, or yourself
his equal; perhaps the purest ex-
ample of great love without equal
ity is the love between parent and
child. In fact the equality doctrine
as a whole, except when surround
ed by plethora of qualifications,
is so untenable that it falls to
pieces at the slightest thoughtful
examination.
Frankfurter closes his opinion
with quotation from Abraham
Lincoln, to whom the Negro owes
more than to any other man. l.
too, would like to quote from
Lincoln. At Charles, ILL.,, in Sep
TENDER, 1858 in a debate with
Douglas, Lincoln said:
/ am not nor ever have been,
in favor of bringing about in any
way the social and political equal
ity of the white and black races;
am not, nort ever have been in
favor of making voters or jurors
of Negroes, nor qualifying them
to hold office . /. l will say in
addition to this that there is a
physical difference between the
white and black races which l be-
lieve will ever forbid the two
races living together on terms of
social and political equality. And
in as much as they cannot so live,
while they do remain together,
there must be the position of SUI
perior and inferior, and l as much
as any other man am in favor of
having the superior position as
signed to the white race"
The extent to which Lincoln
would have modified these views
today, or may have modified them
before his death, is moot ques-
ton, but it is clear on its face
that he would not have been in
sympathy with the Supreme
Courts position on desegregation.
Many historians have felt that
when Lincoln died the South lost
the best friend it had. This also
may be moot, but again it seems
clear that for "a years-from the
horrors of Reconstruction through
the Supreme Courts desegrega-
ton decision-the North has been
trying to force the black man
down the white Southerner's
throat, and it is miracle that
relations between the races in the
South have progressed as well as
they have.
Perhaps the most discouragine
spectacle is the spectacle of the
Northern newspapers dwelling
with pleasure upon the predica-
ment of the Southern parent who
is forced to choose between de.