And the same rules that are to guide them are to
guide her. She and they are to be.obedient to "the
higher powers " — ^those that can force obedience —
except wlien their demands are contrary to the high-



r



V



X



woman's profession. 181

er law of God, and in such a conflict they are " to
obey God rather than nian," and take the conse- ^^
quences whatever they may be. And a woman has
no more difficulty in deciding when to obey God ^
rather than man in the family state than her hus-
band, father, and sons have, in the civil state. And
obedience in the fSamily to " the higher power '* held
by man, is no more a humiliation than is man's obe-
dience to a civil ruler.
If this be so, then tlie doctrine of woman's subju- ^
g ation is establish ed and the opposing doctrine of
Stuart Mills and his followers is in direct opposition
to the teachings both of conmion sense and Chris-
tianiiy.
There is a moral power gi ven to woman in the
family state much more controlling and abiding than J
the inferior, physical power conferred on man. And /
the more men are trained to refinement, honor, and
benevolence, the more this moral power of woman
is increased. This is painfully illustrated in cases
where an amiable and Christian man is bound for
life to an unreasonable, selfish, and obstinate woman.
With such a woman reasoning is useless, and phys-









182 WOMAN SUFFRAGE AND

ical force alone can conquer, and this such a man
cannot employ. The only alternatives are cease-
less conflicts, at the sacrifice of conscience and
self-respect, or hopeless submission to a daily and
grinding tyranny.
