...his letter, Letter from Birmingham Jail, both chose to fight for justice rather than preserve their own safety. They both violated laws that they believed were unjust in order to help people and were willing to suffer the consequences that their actions brought upon them. In other words, they believed that there was a higher good that required them to disobey specific laws. However, even though they both had the same intentions, the methods that they used to achieve their goals differed...
Words: 1069 - Pages: 5
...between just and unjust laws to justify their actions of civil disobedience at the time. King describes to the clergymen that there are two types of laws; those that are just and those that are unjust. Dr. King begins by stating that he does not advocate the disobedience of just laws simply because “One has not only a legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws,” meaning that when a citizen knows that a law is in effect, they have to either follow it or face the punishments that come with breaking the law. Martin Luther King describes a just law as “a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of...
Words: 453 - Pages: 2
...The core of MLK's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" is explaining his actions in Birmingham and the need for nonviolent protests. He takes the need for nonviolent protests one step further by stating it is their moral task to break unjust laws. MLK explains the process they have gone through leading up to the sit-ins and boycotts such as meeting with leaders of the economic community in which merchants promised to remove the racial signs from their stores (3). These promises never came through after months of waiting and the need for directs action arose. He addresses the "untimeliness" of their actions in Birmingham and the need to wait for changes to be made. MKL responds with "For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear...
Words: 312 - Pages: 2
...In his essay/ lecture “Resistance to Civil Government”, the author and philosopher Henry Thoreau argues that a man should not be forced by his own government to do anything that goes against his conscious or natural sense of morality. Likewise, he believes it is better for a man to disobey any law or ruling he deems unjust, and accept the consequences of his actions, rather than live with a mind weighted with guilt.Thoreau himself had experience with this situation, having spent a night in a local jail after refusing to pay his poll taxes, which would have helped to fund the illegal Mexican War. While reading this work, it becomes clear that Thoreau has identified and outlined a few things that he wishes for the reader to do. He encourages the reader to challenge unjust authority, disobey unjust laws, and lastly, seek to make change within the state. Firstly, Thoreau writes that to make a change in civil government, one must challenge the state on issues that are deemed to be unjust, prejudiced and unfair. In particular to the time in which this essay was written, the issue of slavery was at the height of debate. Thoreau himself was an abolitionist, and frequently campaigned and wrote for the cause, even though the practice of slavery was still legal and protected in...
Words: 673 - Pages: 3
...it is most certainly incorporated into it. By its very definition, civil disobedience is, "the refusal to obey certain laws [that one sees to be unjust or oppressive]". The Constitution even says that the people can strike down the government and erect a new one if the aforementioned government is tyrannical. So this idea of passively protesting or peacefully resisting is ingrained into America, which is a prime example of a free society. However how does this ideal affect free society? Henry David Thoreau wrote his essay "Civil Disobedience" in 1848 and published it in 1849. In it, he criticized the government and strongly encouraged every american to not only do the same, but to also commit passive aggressive acts of defiance. As previously stated, every american has the right to do something about an unjust government. Thoreau recognized this, and expanded upon it. While he understands laws and rule purpose as keeping order, Thoreau also comprehends that if the law is to oppress or take away human rights, then the people must protect those right by breaking said law or laws. His essay would be very influential in the future of American history. Not...
Words: 565 - Pages: 3
...Throughout “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, King makes a similar statement about civil disobedience and the law. He states that civil disobedience must occur after four steps are taken. Collection of facts to determine whether there are injustices, negotiation, self purification, and direct action must occur before civil disobedience transpires. He argues that “there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes an injustice when it is used to maintain segregation” (5). Ultimately, a law becomes unjust when it promotes injustice. This is when civil disobedience can occur as laws that promote segregation and inequality are unjust. King appeals to a higher law whenever a command of the state conflicts with his moral principles. Natural law can be described as King’s guide to civil disobedience. When the state does not conform with natural law, civil...
Words: 1609 - Pages: 7
...Jr.‘ Natural Law Theory Comp. 102 Date: 6/5/2013 Paradoxically, Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter from the Birmingham City Jail,” Initially uses classical natural law theory to define his actions, but immediately thereafter contradicts a fundamental tenet of this theory and relies on a “weaker” version of natural law. In doing so, King must attempt to formulate a theory which justifies his illegal actions in view of his moral obligation to obey the law. King’s failure to distinguish between legal obligations and moral obligations yields a logical paradox in his final formation of natural law theory. However, Kings theory need not be completely rejected if his argument is slightly modified to reject the moral obligation to obey laws. King initially uses classical natural law theory as his rational basis to defend his actions. This theory has two main point of views, the first being,” Moral Validity; is a logically necessary condition for legal validity an unjust or immoral law being no law at all” followed by, “The moral order is part of the natural order moral duties being in some sense “read off ” from essences of purpose fixed (perhaps by God) in nature.” According to this theory, morality law, but law that equals morality by definition. Thus for King to use this theory, two requirements are implicit. He must assert that an unjust law is not really a law, and he must provide a moral theory to distinguish just and unjust laws. King first quotes...
Words: 1278 - Pages: 6
...of every citizen to obey the laws (or to persuade others to change them). But in the Apology, he mentions two cases of what he seems to think permissible disobedience to the laws: his past refusal to arrest Leon of Salamis, and his stated intention not to comply with judicial gag order. Does he contradict himself? Explain and defend your answer. NOTES: - Yes, Plato contradicts himself - Why? give reasons - We know from the Gorgias that Socrates believes one must absolutely always avoid committing injustice, but there is no analogous obligation to avoid suffering injustice. So he could consistently hold that one should obey laws that require one to suffer injustice, but should disobey laws that require one to commit injustice. And this is indeed his position. For in the Apology, the laws he announces he would break are commands to commit injustice (since it was unjust to arrest Leon, and it would be unjust to disobey the Oracle’s command to philosophize); but he says one should always obey one’s human superior so long as doing so does not involve disobeying a divine superior or doing something wrong, so even in the Apology he is committed to obeying laws that merely require him to suffer injustice. Likewise, in the Crito, Socrates is committed to obeying the command to suffer injustice (i.e., to let himself be executed), but he says clearly that one should never commit injustice, so even in the Crito he is committed to disobeying any law that required him to commit injustice...
Words: 383 - Pages: 2
...In “On Civil Disobedience and Non-Violence,” he says that people should disobey the wrong laws and wrong government. He appeals everyone to stand up for rights and justice by doing “simple, quiet, truthful carrying on of what you consider good and needful.” The simple, quiet and patient action which Budrus inhabitants considered right is just to stand on the land for building Separation barrier “until we made sure there would be no construction work” (Dalby). They did not use any arms or violence to prevent Israeli soldiers from building the barrier. Moreover, this action exemplifies Tolstoy’s ideas because it does not involve in the Palestinian government. At that time, “while the Palestinian elite attend talks and readily accept painful concessions on settlements" (Cheslow), Budrus resisted Israel consistently and non-violently...
Words: 1210 - Pages: 5
...Moral Obligation In the "Crito" written by Plato, the argument of whether or not it is morally right to escape prison is in question. At the beginning of the dialogue, Crito offers Socrates an escape though Socrates has already made up his mind and quickly refuses this opportunity. For Socrates believes that though he may have been convicted for the wrong reasons, the laws are just. In this essay, I will examine both arguments given by Crito and Socrates. Crito does not start with very strong arguments to persuade Socrates. His first argument is that if he does not escape, he will not only lose a close friend, but people will be left to believe that instead of using his money to save Socrates, he selfishly did not help him. For this Crito would lose his reputation and be looked upon in bad light. His second argument is telling Socrates that he would be able to live happily somewhere outside of Athens. He makes it known that he has friends in places such as Thessaly, and that they would ensure his safety and wellbeing. Crito's final argument seems to be his strongest. He calls Socrates a coward and fool. "No man should bring children into the world who is unwilling to preserve to the end in their nurture and education" (PUT MARK). Here Crito is feeling as though Socrates is taking the easy way out in not escaping. Betraying not only his own life, but betraying his children's lives. Though all three of these arguments seem valid, none of them seem relevant to whether escaping...
Words: 1243 - Pages: 5
.... . think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them . . .Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform?” Thoreau argues that if a law is wrong, it’s wrong, whether or not the majority agrees doesn’t matter. Kim Davis, a Kentucky clerk, argued the same thing when she refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Although not everyone may agree with her, she clearly embodied civil disobedience as she resisted a federal law and was jailed temporarily. Ultimately, these three share the similarity of peacefully fighting against laws they consider immoral. Together, they showed the power that civil disobedience can have at turning hearts. Peaceful resistance to unjust laws serves as a moral checkup for a society, demonstrating its positive impact. Laws are created to serve and protect. They are meant to provide citizens with services they need and to protect them against crimes and infringements upon their rights. When laws break this social contract and are immoral and unfair, they must be peacefully resisted. This resistance will benefit society by promoting change in government and in people’s hearts. What is right never changes although the majority opinion...
Words: 800 - Pages: 4
...verbal, and emotional abuse to fight for their freedom once more, and his name was Martin Luther King, Jr. King writes a letter titled, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail"; in this he helps both his audience, the white clergymen, and the rest of the segregated United States understand how these unjust laws are restricting African Americans from their constitutional and God-given rights. He also empathizes the feelings of exhaustion, anger, and hatred that the African Americans feel towards the federal government, and more specifically, the white clergymen who are taking these rights away from them. As King stated, "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws" (3). Also, in the same sense he gives a definition of just and unjust laws. He says, "A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law" (3). Agreeing with King's earlier statement, we all have that moral conscience that knows right from wrong and when to stand up for what is right, so from an individual or group standpoint it is "okay" to disobey unjust laws. However, you...
Words: 1324 - Pages: 6
...the government is civil disobedience. Theologian Henry David Thoreau created the term “Civil Disobedience” in his 1849 essay. One partakes in civil disobedience when one defines opposition to laws on a moral basis and accepts the consequences in order to call attention to, or bring about change (Brownlee). It has been implemented several times over the course of almost one-hundred and seventy years, and today it still is used to great effect. Despite many calling civil disobedience an excuse for anarchy and labeling it superfluous...
Words: 797 - Pages: 4
...are “JUST” and “UNJUST” laws. “JUST” laws are ones that are made for people to follow to live by and everyone is affected by these types of laws, “UNJUST” laws are ones that are primarily based on outing certain minorities. The posted speed limit is a “JUST” law that does not focus on any one type of person or persons. It is there for people’s safety, and for everyone to follow. It does not state 45 ect… This meaning that it is your duty to obey the posted speed limit. By you not following the posted limit, you are breaking a “JUST” law, not only are you breaking the law, you are also putting your life in danger as we as putting others at risk for not obeying the speed limit, Children that use the crosswalk to get to school, people that are riding their bikes to work and school, as well as other motorist that also want to make it to their destination on time and alive. If you feel that the posted speed limit is an “UNJUST” law then you have every right to try and change this by speaking your mind and voting on it and asking people to see and understand why you think that this is an “UNJUST” law. There are right and wrong ways to go about this, the right was is to make yourself heard and bring it to lawmaker’s attention, the wrong way is driving down 66th street at 82 miles per hour putting many people at risk for your beliefs of the laws. Although I do not believe that you will get far on this matter because it is a “JUST” law that helps with peoples...
Words: 505 - Pages: 3
...we truly be punished for breaking laws that break moral code? According to Antigone and Martin Luther King Jr the answer appears to be no. They both defend their actions that break the rules yet favor different rhetorical devices. Throughout Antigone’s speech she seems to favor pathos to convey her reason to break a law. When explaining her actions she evokes the emotion in her audience by explaining what would have happened if she had follow the laws she would have allowed her “own mothers son to not”, then explains how it would “have been agony”, the perspective draws an emotional response that she hopes to use as empathy. When threatened death as a punishment she expresses that if she “is to die before her time” that she would “consider that a gain”. She again uses pathos to draw motion from the king by explaining that death would be worth her action. This adds a more dramatic moment which in turn causes more emotion. Unlike Antigone Martin Luther King Jr uses logic through logos to make his argument after being called an “extremist” he explains this is not always a bad thing....
Words: 440 - Pages: 2
