Image provided by: Silverton Country Historical Society; Silverton, OR
About Torch of reason. (Silverton, Oregon) 1896-1903 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 20, 1898)
T H E TORCH OF REASON, SILV E R T O N , OREGON, TH U R SD A Y , JA N U A R Y 20, 1898. 4 I T ir c h I O I V II ai VI I L ib e rty to Do W ro n g . P P M Q f i r i ' S ecu larism > ar,d how can a n V reaw' r y v c i o v r i i onable person pxpect Us to print The Only P aper of Its Kind. all the ol<l re-hashes of god and spirit m ysticism s th at real S ecular Published W eekly bv the Lilieral U n i ists are tired < f? T h e re are many versity Com pany, in the In terests of honest people with m any honest C onstructive, Moral secularism . thoughts, and we respect them for J. E. H o sm e r,....................... E ditor In th at excellent Ereethought journal, the Boston Investigator, of December 25th, is an article by Mr. Cyrus W. Coolridge, in which this gentlem an calls to account a state ment we m ad e in th e T orch some Manager’the'r tyjn,‘Ft5r ""d w"uld ?«ht ,or th e ir rig h t to ex p ress >uch th o u g h t-1. w eeks p. ago. T h e s ta te m e n t is as E ntered at th e jw>stotfice at Silverton, hut we are not able to assist them follows: “ No one should have the Oregon, as seconu-class mail m atter. in publishing all their thoughts, liberty to do wrong.” SUBSCRIPTION RATES. One year, in a d v an c e .................. ..$ 1 00 .. 5G Six m onths in a d v an c e .................... 25 T hree m onths, in ad v an ce................ In clubs of five or m ote, one year, <o in a d v an c e .......................................... Money should lie sent by registered le tte r or m oney order. Notice! A pencil m ark here denotes th a t your subscription will expire w ith th e next num ber. You are earnestly requested to renew so th a t you may receive the pa per w ithout in te rru p tio n . We bave de cided th a t it is best for all concerned th a t we do not send pcpers longer th an th e tim e paid for u less so ordered. T his will prevent any loss ami we will know ju st where we stand. W e request you to send us the nam es of Secularists who m ight become su b scribers ami we will mail sam ple copies. THURSDAY, JA N . 20, E. M. 298 T h e F ifth P s a lm . To th e F reethinker» called S ecularists. G ive ear to our words, O ye p e o p le ; List to th e Voice of our cry. U nto thee we will p ra y ; thou c a n st hear us, And answ er a t once if th o u ’lt try. As long as we’ve breath we will pray thee, For we’re sure you’ve no pleasure in sin, And will help us to spread th e glad tid in g s Of freedom from wrongs th a t been. have T h e foolish old dogm as and errors, W e know th a t thou h a te st them a l l ; B ut we would redeem , not destroy them W ho’re d rin k in g life’s bitterest gall. W e’ll build for thee, houses of science W here the youth will learn tru th w ithout fear. Oh, help us to do this, ye people,— To enem ies tu rn a deaf ear. To the cause, som e cannot prove fa ith ful ; T h eir m inds are u nable to clasp Any th o u g h t except th a t of d e stru c tio n : C onstruction they never can grasp. W e would not condem n them , O people, B u t show them th e tru th am i th e rig h t, And help F reeth o u g h t children he build ers To work against orthodox blight. T hen soon we’ll rejoice all to g eth er; H u m a n ity ’ll all shout for joy, Because we will all lie as b ro th ers; No creeds to m olest nor destroy. And if w ith thy shield th o u ’lt protect us, And help us In righteousness b u ild ; Spite the Davids of old and th e lovers of gold, Sec’lar prophesies will be fulfilled. N o t O p en to All. It seems to he the param ount boast of some L ite ra l papers and societies th a t they are open and free to all for the expression of ev- ery honest thought. This irf not th e boast of the T orch of R eason , and we believe that it is not for the interest of our cause nor our pa- trons to endeavor to publish every- thing. We haven’t space nor time t<> publish h alf what we w ant 10 on the subject of constructive, m oral even if we wished to, and some peo ple have thoughts th at seem so il logical to us th a t we think their pnhlic-'tion a waste of time and a detrim ent to the world. This does not signify th a t we do not want our friends to write articles for the T orch . The tru th is, for this very reason, we need more help than those who print everything for ev erybody. Our idea is not to print anything th a t will mystify the m inds of even the children. Of course we might see fit to publish a regular spook or other unscientific or illogical a rti cle, hut if we should it would he im m ediately followed with our ideas of its absurdities. In this way we hope to appeal to the com mon sense of our readers, and when they see that their children and friends are not to he stuffed with absurdities from the pens of m ys tery mongers and unprincipled mongrel m inisters they will appre ciate the change. Every periodical is a teacher, and for a teacher to teach th a t which tends to mystify his pupils is stultifying, destroying, crim inal. And yet here are period icals— teachers that are full of m ys tery. They are not satisfied with printing, hut the picture of a m y th ical savior with glory shining all about his tangled hair, angels with feathered wings and doves sup p o sed to be holy ghosts, etc., etc., are dished up to the poor children who ought to be learning the tru th . Don’t you think, dear reader, th at it is about tim e to have one little Porch of Reason? We can make an excellent teacher and friend out of our papei if those who love com mon sense will help m ake it so. W hat do we want? We want more subscribers; we w ant money enough so we can have the paper illustrated each week; we w ant a larger correspondence; we want friends who will write good, short Secular stories and other articles, and we w ant the very best you can “ scare u p ’’ in the way of Secular poems and gems of thought. Pure Secular literature suitable for our work is scarce, and as we are busy, very busy, with our school work, it oftentim es overworks our force to keep everything going. Secular friends, help bs keep the T orch of R eason Secular; help us m ake it better in every way possi- ble; help us to give it a wider cir- culation, and the seeds of good we may thus sow working together will spring up in after years and hear the precious fruits of happiness. We are open to conviction and w ith o u t reg ard to who is right <»r wrong in his ideas of this im p o rt ant question, let us investigate it. Mr. Coolridge asks us to tell who is to decide what is lig h t and w hat is wrong. W ell, friend Cyrus, your reason should decide for you, and if you disobey its decisions it will punish you. If, in actions af fecting others, your reason leads you to d<> what is contrary to the reason of the m ajority of those with whom you associate, and they con sider your actions wrong or d etri m ental to the society, then the m a jo rity should decide. T he m ajority m ay make a m istake, hut its decis ion is the highest standard we have —the best guide th a t can he found — the best and nearest to an infal lible regulator of our actions tow ard others, and without obedience to this regulator, which the world has been so long in learning to obey, we can have no free men and women. Surely •r our friend would not ad- vacate the idea th at one should have the liberty to commit m urder. “ Murder is wrong” , says M r. Cool- ridge’s reason. “ M urder is wrong,” says the m ajority, and laws are made to prevent m urder. O ur friend makes some statem ents which we believe to be true, hut they have hut little bearing on the subject. It m ay be hard — it is very hard to decide w hat is for the good of hu m anity, i. e., v>hat is right. The T orch oe R eason believes th at it is not wrong to work on S unday and the C hristian Advocate believes th a t it is, hut this does not argue th at anyone should have the liberty to do wrong. Infidels with a m ajority of the C hristians of this country have decided th a t it is right for man to think as he choos es, and that he can express th at thought, being o«dy accountable for the abuse of the right, therefore we have the right to th in k and ad- vocate what is thought to be wrong by others, and they have the sam e privilege, hut certainly no one should have the liberty to do wrong. It may l>e hard to decide, we repeat, w hat is wrong, but no one should have the liberty to do wrong when it is decided by the best ability of the m ajority. If we contradict this and say th a t all should have the liberty to do wrong, or as Mr. Coolridge seems to ad- vocate, th at all should do as they think is right w hether it is or not, then if one th in k s it rig h t to “ en- joy himself at the expense of another m an ”, he should have the liberty to do so. If we should have the liberty to do one wrong we eer- t&inlv should have the liberty to do all wrong. Now where are we? Should I have the right to murder? Should Mr. C<>olridge have the r ig h t to steal? Should we have the liberty io do any wrong? Jef- ferson, Paine, and W ashington were not m urderers, Mr. Coolridge; th e y fought in self defense and for the defense of th eir friends. If they d id n ’t, if they were m urder ers, they should not have had the liberty to kill their fellow men. In regard to using the U. S. m ails for all kinds of pictures, we are of the opinion th a t the m ajor ity of the people of the United States should decide this question, and if they see fit Io delegate the power to regulate th is m atter to some one m an or set of men we see nothing in this, w hether it is thought to be right or wrong, to prove that anyone should have the liberty to do wrong. The T orch of R eason th in k s it can see the fallacy of Mr. Cool- ridge’s reasoning(?). H e says th at our statem ent that ‘ no one should have the liberty to do wrong” , is ihe m otto of the C atholic Church and all haters of progress. The Catholics m ay have m isconstrued its m eaning and used it th u s to further its cause, and so we think our friend has m isconstrued its m eaning as his next statem ent shows. H e says, “ Every man should have the right not only to think hut also to do wrong— th a t is to say, what o th er people consider wrong— so long as he does not in fringe upon the rights of other peo ple.” W hy, of course, Mr. Cool ridge, a m an should have the liber ty to do what others consider wrong, and they should have the liberty to do w hat he considers wrong. No one disputes this, hut, poor fellow, can you not see that you, in your blind endeavor to pick a little flaw in the T orch of R eas on , ju st because you have some ideas th a t you know seem very ridiculous to us, have proven that in one instance at least your judg m ent is poor and your reason lack ing? A m an should have the liberty 1° do wrong provided he does right, i- provided “ he does not infringe upon the rights of o th ers” . You ^ee, when a m an does a thing think- R is right and it does not in- fringe upon the rights of others, it is rig h t even if it is wrong. The trouble lies in Ihe m eaning of the words right and wrong. Pope said, hatever is is rig h t.” If this be true, and we th in k there is some tru th in it if we are careful to u n derstand w hat he m eans by right, do one can have the liberty to do wrong. We do not pretend, and did not pretend, to tell w hat is right and wrong, although we are willing to