Freedom: much like love is essential to life, a right given to all creatures as soon as they take

In hopes of creating a better sense of credibility, which encourages people to accept his idea or “dream”, King mentions the Declaration of Independence. Dr. king makes himself credible by challenging what citizens known as the unalienable rights. Unalienable rights, are rights that cannot be taken away from a human being. They are considered rights given to people by God himself, when they are born. In the third paragraph he quotes, ‘the unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. “This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” He uses the quote to show that the Supreme Court should be on his side. However, he then goes on to tell how even though it should be on his side it is not. “It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note.” He is stating that the American government has neglected their promise to ALL of the American people. By doing this he is asking the readers to ask themselves, why has America failed to reach the expectations of equality? Why is the injustice only occurring to blacks? And most importantly, What can be done to change this? In another attempt to appear more credible, King often times quotes the bible. His use of the bible can cause an emotional response, but

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a key figure in the civil rights movements that took place in the 1950s and 1960s. The “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” is an open letter written by King defending nonviolent resistance against racism. The letter argued that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust and unethical laws. The letter also stresses themes of unity among brothers in order to overcome racism. I will argue in support of King’s stance that citizens are morally justified in breaking unjust laws and that openly and responsibly opposing unjust laws is itself a duty of every citizen.

In his correspondence to his fellow clergymen entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King, a promoter of peace and brotherhood, analyzes his act of non-violent resistance to clarify the necessitate of producing creative tension. King begins by elucidating the differences between just and unjust laws. According to King, unjust laws are human laws that are not harmonized with the natural laws of God that cause the degradation of personality and damage the soul. According to this ideology, King states that when injustice occurs there is a correct approach to civil disobedience. First, King expects one to collect information regarding the immoral implication of law with the intent of proving injustice. This requires one to be able to distinguish between the laws of man and the laws of good, the immoral laws and moral laws, the unjust laws and just laws. Next, negotiation is used to establish an understanding of the endured injustice; however, this purpose is not to humiliate or defeat the adversary, but to promote friendship through a form of selfless and spiritual love known as agape. As Martin Luther King Jr. points out, “It is an overflowing love which seeks noting in return. And when you come to love on this level you begin to love men not because they are likeable, not because they do things that attract us, but because God loves them and here we love the person who does the evil deed while hating the deed that the person does” (“Non-violence” 2).

King’s ideas regarding civil rights and injustice are valued by most people, and this essay demonstrates how articulate and meaningful his words truly are. Although opposite views can be noted, based on the logistical aspects of struggle, the rational, ethical, and emotional views that King expressed can not accurately be refuted. This essay precisely expresses the importance of fighting for justice, and the correct manner in which to do

Throughout the essay, Dr. King counters their logic and assumption and appealing to first ethos by building his credibility as an activist and secondly logos by referencing history, religious leaders and ancient philosophers whom employed similar tactics while confronting oppression and unjust laws. He successfully employs pathos appeals, citing several examples of unpunished crimes committed against the black community and appealing to logos, while countering their criticisms of creating tensions through the unwise use and timing of his direct-action program protesting. He ends his essay triumphantly with appeals to ethos, pathos and logos by defending his extremism, condemning the clergy’s silence with racial injustice, while offering hope of inevitable change to the black community. I found it difficult to assess any weakness within this essay; however, it leaves the door wide open to controversy regarding breaking unjust laws.

King, Jr. was a strong believer in the fact that every race should be treated equally to one another. As Edward Berry stated in his own Rhetorical Analysis, “Doing Time: King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail””, King dreamed of a time where whites and blacks could be equal (111). Some of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s largest achievements through this movement where the March on Washington, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and obviously the Birmingham Campaign. He gave his all into this movement and on April 4, 1969, at the young age of 39, was assassinated because of his belief in racial equality and gave his life for the Civil Rights Campaign. Like Martin Luther King said in his piece, “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, “I am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom far beyond my own hometown (1). And that he did. Which is one of the biggest reasons that he is so widely remembered in the United States of America and

Freedom and civil rights have always been a thorn in America history for a long time ago. Racial unfairness and humanity deprivation was what most colored American people suffered most back in the day. Although the government aimed and worked for equality among every citizen, there is no point to deny that it has failed countless time in the past. However, just because the government failed to acknowledge the rights of colored citizens doesn’t mean that it can stay that way forever and that exactly what the Supreme Court did in the case of Loving V Virginia.

A chiefly odious ruling was written in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. Argued before the Court in 1896 and ultimately overruled by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the Court, heard the case of a man named Plessy. One-eighths black, Plessy boarded a white-only car only which resulted in his arrest and jailing for violating of discriminatory segregationist statutes. The Court, under Justice Henry Billings Brown’s majority opinion, affirmed these segregationist policies establishing the infamous ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. As history would prove, the accommodations made for nonwhite Americans in many cases failed to even approach the threshold of equal. Plessy v. Ferguson stands in direct conflict with the promise of “equal justice under law”. With such a narrow interpretation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, which in part provided for equal protection under law, the Court yielded great deference to a harsh sociopolitical environment, ultimately sanctioning the segregation that would defile the American dream for many years, until Brown v. Board. The only dissenter in this case, Chief Justice John Harlan’s now-canonic phrase “our Constitution is color-blind,” (Hutchison, 427) reminds us that, contrary to the idea of the majority in this

Throughout history, there has been discrimination against race, religion, gender, orientation, age, among many other things. From the British preventing the colonists’ rights to the “separate but equal” doctrine people used to justify discrimination against African Americans, America has had its fair share of it. After years of the mockery of equality that African Americans had, change was needed. Out of the thousands of voices who brought the winds of change, that were heard the most were: Martin Luther King Jr., for convincing people to join their cause; Thurgood Marshall, who used the law to get people to listen to their voices; and the Silent Majority, for without them, freedom would never truly ring from every mountainside.

Martin Luther King believes that the government can’t say you can’t do something. Martin Luther King believes that everyone should have civil rights. Civil rights are rights that everyone has earned when they are born. He believes that many people don't have their civil rights yet. Without any legal features or any pressure, they may not get any.

Martin Luther King Jr. was one of many great civil rights activists that have fought for equal rights. Throughout the 1960’s he persevered through many things such as, “On March 7, 1965, a civil rights march, planned from Selma to Alabama's capitol in Montgomery, turned violent as police with nightsticks and tear gas met the demonstrators as they tried to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge. King was not in the march, however the attack was televised showing horrifying images of marchers being bloodied and severely injured. Seventeen demonstrators were hospitalized leading to the naming the event "Bloody Sunday." Everyone, young or old, gay or straight, women or man, everyone should get equal rights and this man shows why and how we can do it.

To begin with, To achieve true freedom society must find a peaceful approach with non-violence to finally have equality. According to "Letter From Birmingham jail by Martin Luther King Jr" King proclaimed "As a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law."This shows that King wanted no one to break the law with violence unless

On June 25, 2013, the Supreme Court made its final decision on the Shelby County, Alabama v Holder, deeming Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, passed by Congress in 1965 and extended several times, unconstitutional. Section 5, although not being struck down, became insignificant without its triggering formula, Section 4, to determine the coverage. This Supreme Court decision took away the key parts of the Voting Rights Act, which was an important method for the federal government to oversee and enforce the enfranchisement of African-Americans in some states. While justifying their decision, the Court mentioned that Section 4 only applied to specific states and it was against the idea of equal sovereignty of all states in the Constitution. What is more, the Congress’ justification of these unequal actions towards those states in 2006, was based on 40-year old data showing that it was still an exceptional condition, which cannot reflect the current situations and needs of the country.

During civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr.’s incarceration, he received a letter from his fellow Alabama Clergymen expressing their concerns about appealing to law and order and common sense. Because he had a lot of time on his hands, as stated at the end of his response, he wrote a quite long and elaborate letter. In this letter, King justified himself from the arguments made by the clergy communicating his thoughts both passionately and conveying confidence. They accuse him of being an outsider utilizing hatred and violence in an “unwise and untimely” manner. He defends his position on nonviolent direct action addressing not only the 8 clergymen but any apathetic persons in the United States.

Today we accept that freedom is a basic right human right but what exactly is freedom. 1On one hand, there is physical freedom. People who are not imprisoned or enslaved are free. On the other hand, there is freedom as a the right to act, speak or think what you want. People cannot reach their full potential if they are not free in both senses of the word.