Civil Disobedience Vs. Civil Law

Have you ever felt a rule you had to follow was unjust? Have you ever felt your moral instinct tell you not to follow it? Prominent figures in American history, Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau, felt this way and decided to not follow the rules imposed on them by indulging in “civil disobedience”. Civil disobedience is the act of peacefully disobeying laws or customs with the purpose of combating moral injustice. This form of protest has proven to be quite effective in making change in history. In “Civil Disobedience” and the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, both Thoreau and King Jr. write their justification for their actions as well as their feelings regarding the particular disputed

From the monarchs of the ancient era to the democracy of today, order has been maintained by means of rules and regulations known as laws. Compliance with these laws is enforced through punishments ranging in severity according to the crimes committed to reduce violence and misconduct from individuals within a society. However, just as citizens consent to abide by the laws of the state in which they reside, one is compelled to preserve justice and condemn the unjust decisions of man when the social contract contradicts the laws sanctioned by God. Approaching this conflict between natural and manmade laws in a non-violent manner is called “civil disobedience”.

Henry David Thoreau wrote Civil Disobedience, which is about him trying to persuade citizens that their obligation is to contravene and correct the unfair laws of the government. Thoreau begins Civil Disobedience with the view point “That government is best which governs least”

Civil disobedience is the act of nonviolently refusing to obey certain laws as a form of political protest. This usually results in accepting the consequences of breaking the law, such as jail time. Martin Luther King Jr., a proponent of civil disobedience breaks down this definition by stating the differences between two types of laws: just and unjust. One difference King makes states “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” (King 39). In other words, King states that a just law must agree with the principles of our own truths: what we perceive as right and wrong.

I believe civil disobedience is the refusal to obey certain laws, usually without violence, but only if it’s to make a point. In Thoreau’s essay about civil disobedience, there were points made which I agreed with, but there were things that I disagreed with. Some points he made that I agreed with was that if someone wants something to change, they should do something and do it wholeheartedly. An additional point he made which I agreed with was to depend and think for one’s self. While he’s made points which I agreed with, there’s one I didn’t which was when he said that the military was programmed to do whatever the government says.

Civil Disobedience In Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau, Thoreau discusses his feelings on the proposal that people need to openly resist the government. Thoreau explains that a government shouldn’t intrude into men’s lives, that the government is only an expedient, meaning it’s merely a means to an end. He describes the need for a government thata leaves the people of the United States alone, that “…government is best which governs least”. Thoreau supports his ideas stated in Civil Disobedience by criticizing the current (current during the time) faults in the United States government.

Civil Disobedience is defined as the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest. To several governments and even some citizens, civil disobedience can be seen as a bad way of handling situations. To others, it is just a way of expressing how they feel about decisions the government make and it makes them feel as though they have a voice in how the decisions are mad. In the essay, “Civil Disobedience,” by Henry David Thoreau, there are several connections made to how the people should react to the government “controlling” them and what should be done about it. “Civil Disobedience” also makes connections to the article, Faced With a Fracking Giant, This Small Town Legalized Civil Disobedience. In both of these forms of writing, they discuss the main idea of civil disobedience and the impacts it may have on the government and the people as a whole.

In the modern age of America, there are many people who have read and abided by the beliefs of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is a philosophy created by Henry Thoreau that states one must not conform to certain laws for a variety of reasons, which was also an ideology utilized by Martin Luther King Jr. The world has witnessed many acts of disobedience from the masses, and have thus portrayed the idea that this belief still operates successfully. The ideology that surrounds civil disobedience also strongly influences the individual in a particular society, which also depicts the principles of this belief have adjusted to the modern world. In the new age of America, the beliefs of Thoreau and King are still prevalent and found in society due to the influence it has on movement that brings change; thus, illustrating that American citizens commonly refer and utilize this belief.

Civil disobedience is defined as the “refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in government policy or legislation, characterized by nonviolent means”; theories on this topic have been debated for centuries. (American Heritage Dictionary 3rd Edition pg161) Henry David Thoreau was well known for his refusal to participate in the political systems or activities of his era, not only by refusing to pay his poll taxes for six consecutive years, but also by announcing that he did not wish to be regarded as a member of any incorporated society. In Civil Disobedience, Thoreau stresses the need to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws. A person should not be obligated to devote his or her life to eliminating evils from the world, but is only obligated not to participate in such evils themselves. He argues that the government rarely proves itself useful and this derives from the power from the majority because they are the strongest group, not because they hold the most legitimate views. Justice is the quality of being just, impartial or fair. Thoreau doubted the effectiveness of reform within the government, and argued that voting and petitioning for change served useless. He felt that justice had different standards for each different group. Which raises the question, is justice fair for everyone? When a government is unjust, people should

From the time we are children and throughout the duration of our lives, we are told to abide by certain sets of rules. In most situations this is a perfectly acceptable expectation; speed limits, remaining quiet in libraries, and waiting until the age of twenty-one to drink are all reasonable things to ask of people. After all, these rules and laws are put in place to ensure a peaceful and safe society. However, when these rules begin to infringe upon the rights of certain groups, some citizens turn to civil disobedience as a form of protest. While some may argue that civil disobedience is nothing more than a violation of the law, it has also proven to have a positive impact on society, in more ways than one. Used by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin

One topic that always comes up with tombs with mummies is that they all have curses and anyone who enters or sees the mummy will be killed within the next 24 hours. One curse that is worldwide famous is the curse of the Pharaoh where anyone who disturbed king Tut`s tomb would be killed by a horrendous curse. The same with a mummy found in the Alps in Italy that was named after the mountain it was found on it is commonly known as Otzi, he also has a horrendous cures that ends with death. Both mummies have curses that are deadly but they both have different stories and one doesn't even have any warnings about if he is disturbed then he will curse the occupants until death or anything like that, another thing is that how the occupants died and

We must first discuss why we should obey laws to begin with. Singer gives two arguments in favor of obeying laws. He explains that first; people do not voluntarily refrain from hurting others so we need laws to deal with these matters. Secondly, we must have some kind of machinery to deal with the lawbreakers (Singer 296). Singer also reminds us that these two arguments for obeying law are neither universally applicable nor conclusive (Singer 297). Civil disobedience itself can be viewed the same way. It must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There are rules as to what civil disobedience is, but there is no clear-cut universal answer in deciding to be civilly disobedient (Singer 297). Civil disobedience is about purposefully disobeying a law or rule to make a point, to try and change laws and rules in a specific situation, and is disobedience that is executed in a non-violent manner.

Furthermore, a person who acts with civil disobedience means, in the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “One who breaks an unjust law… openly, lovingly…, and with a willingness to accept the penalty”. In other words, civil disobedience is respectfully breaking a law that is disagreed with, and then openly accepting the consequence. During the world’s history,

Thoreau demands civil disobedience from his fellow countryman to correct the errors of the government in regards to slavery and the war of his time. Thoreau defines this concept as a deed of willful resistance, obtained by disobeying the hypocritical laws. One deed he offers his countrymen to consider as their deed of civil disobedience, is a refusal to pay taxes. Another deed, one Thoreau highly recommends, is to avert oneself from conspiring with the government in refusing to actively participate in it. Most importantly civil disobedience is civil. Meaning that the resistance to the government is peaceful and non-violent in it’s methods.

According Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, he mentions that to require civil disobedience, the circumstances must be like America’s. Circumstances like practicing war, deriving power from the people, having unjust laws, and supporting slavery. Thoreau writes, “must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation?” (Thoreau ). He mentions how no man should be subdued to any government or institution, especially if it portrays unjust. Therefore he also implies that if a law exhibits unjust, the population should not follow the law with the knowledge of the consequence. Similarly, Thoreau establishes, “when . . . a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize,” (Thoreau ). He explains how it expresses the duty of Americans to rebel and use civil disobedience, it is not just a right, but it drives Americans to be aware of and completely use for the advantage of society. Thoreau further explains the unlawful government by stating, “I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which the slave's government also,” (Thoreau ). He describes the circumstance of America as a prejudiced institution, which rightfully allows citizens to use their duty of civil disobedience. A government should require unjust laws, slavery, aggressive law, and strength over intelligence to cause civil disobedience. However, civil disobedience a citizen’s duty and they must maintain it.