n at this insult to the woman whom she loved and revered
above all others, but she was outraged at this deliberate attempt to
deny personal liberty of thought and speech. Leaving the chair she said
in an impassioned appeal:

The one distinct feature of our association has been the right of
individual opinion for every member. We have been beset at each
step with the cry that somebody was injuring the cause by the
expression of sentiments which differed from those held by the
majority. The religious persecution of the ages has been carried on
under what was claimed to be the command of God. I distrust those
people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice
it always coincides with their own desires. All the way along the
history of our movement there has been this same contest on account
of religious theories. Forty years ago one of our noblest men said
to me, "You would better never hold another convention than allow
Ernestine L. Rose on your platform;" because that eloquent woman,
who ever stood for justice and freedom, did not believe in the
plenary inspiration of the Bible. Did we banish Mrs. Rose? No,
indeed!

Every new generation of converts threshes over the same old straw.
The point is whether you will sit in judgment on one who questions
the divine inspiration of certain passages in the Bible derogatory
to women. If Mrs. Stanton had written approvingly of these passages
you would not have brought in this resolution for fear the cause
might be injured among the _liberals_ in religion. In other words,
if she had written _your_ views, you would not have considered a
resolution necessary. To pass this one is to set back the hands on
the dial of reform.

What you should say to outsiders is that a Christian has neither
more nor less rights in our association than an atheist. When our
platform becomes too narrow for people of all creeds and of no
creeds, I myself can not stand upon it. Many things have been said
and done by our _orthodox_ friends which I have felt to be
extremely harmful to our cause; but I should no more consent to a
resolution denouncing them than I shall consent to this. Who is to
draw the line? Who can tell now whether these commentaries may not
prove a great help to woman's emancipation from old superstitions