Revolution Backwards
Partial Report of Hearing on Johnston Sunday Bill, S. 404
- Contents- Argument by Prof. W. W. Prescott
- Class Legislation
- History of the Bill
- The Next Step
- Only Upon Religious Grounds
- “Innocent Beginnings”
- Not a Mere Theory
- How Public Worship Should be Protected
- Argument by Prof. A. T. Jones
- Character of Sunday Legislation
- Revolution Backwards
- How Religious Liberty was Established in the United States
- The Flag and Patriotism
- Do Sunday Laws Preserve a Nation?
- What Is the Equivalent?
- Religion a Necessity
- The Inevitable Result
-
Search Results
- Results
- Related
- Featured
- Weighted Relevancy
- Content Sequence
- Relevancy
- Earliest First
- Latest First
- Exact Match First, Root Words Second
- Exact word match
- Root word match
- EGW Collections
- All collections
- Lifetime Works (1845-1917)
- Compilations (1918-present)
- Adventist Pioneer Library
- My Bible
- Dictionary
- Reference
- Short
- Long
- Paragraph
No results.
EGW Extras
Directory
Revolution Backwards
The bill reads: “That it shall be unlawful for any person or corporation in the District of Columbia on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, to labor at any trade or secular calling.”RJSB 13.2
Secular calling! The antonym of secular is religious. The Act is “for the proper observance of Sunday.” Sunday is religions. So then, since it is religious, it is revolutionary. Revolution, in itself, is not wrong, because this nation was established by revolution: but this is revolution in the wrong way: it is backward, and that kind of revolution is doubly wrong.RJSB 13.3
But the Constitution of the United States specifically establishes religious right, in that—note it—“Congress shall make no ... law prohibiting the free exercise of religion;” and any legislation respecting Sunday observance does prohibit the free exercise of religion; it even prohibits the free exercise of those who observe Sunday, and whom the legislation is supposed to favor.RJSB 13.4