The Civil Court 's Decision And The People Should Obey It 's Working But Better Than We Expected

Eight Alabama Clergymen were expressed understanding that honest opinions in racial matters could properly be followed in the judges, but urged that decisions of those courts should in the meantime be peacefully obeyed. Responsible citizens have undertaken to work on various problems which cause racial friction and unrest. However, they confronted by a series of demonstrations. .....

Many times, disagreements fail to bring an understanding to opposing sides because each side has different views on the subject at hand. In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. attempts to establish an adequate definition of “just” and “unjust” laws. King knew he could not directly argue his beliefs of segregation because the clergymen made clear they were not impressed with anti-segregationists breaking the law. He knew in order to make a valid rebuttal he could not cause confrontation. What is most interesting about the letter is the style of writing King uses to argue for righteousness which compels the reader to share his views of anti-segregation.

The attempt to negotiate has proven that those who want to respond will respond, but those who do not simply ignore. The clergymen may believe that negotiation is the easiest solution to all problems, but sadly that is not the case. The question is meant to convince the reader that negotiation does not work in a civil rights activist’s favor when it comes to segregation. The clergymen assert that King’s actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence (328). King asks, “But is this a logical assertion?” (328). It is not right to ask a man to give up his constitutional rights just because it could cause violence. Everyone is entitled to their freedom, and it is not wrong to fight for what is right. Therefore, King’s actions to protect those with little to no rights should not be

In “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. resolutely responds to eight clergymen who question his methods of protest against segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. Specifically, in paragraphs 12-14, Dr. King explains why his protests are indeed being done in a timely manner to obtain the “constitutional and God-given rights” (A Portable Anthology, page 207) that Africans have been restricted of for over 340 years. Dr. King’s argument, combined with his strategic use of rhetorical devices to enhance it, helps create a palpable feeling of understanding that captivates the audience into seeing America through his vision.

The following day after the case was presented to the Supreme Justices, the Dallas Morning News paper gave a few remarks about how “the federal government stood alongside the state of Mississippi in the Supreme Court and pleaded for delay in further desegregation…”1 The use of the federal government in this situation is to have the reader sympathize with Mississippi and is even followed by “pleaded” to further the sympathy. “The government shared the frustrations of black school children…”1 is written to try to balance out the biased opinion but when ‘children’ is used instead of students, it creates a belittling picture of their opposition. The administration’s chief civil rights lawyer, Jerris Leonard, was quoted saying that both the North and South had made “’substantial breakthroughs’ in desegregation of schools… but that

In towns and counties across the state, militia units paraded and Kentucky citizen’s gathered to shout protests against Britain’s obvious disregard or the sovereignty and the dignity of the United States. Never, after 1807, would influential Kentucky politicians argue that British restrictions upon American trade were a matter of private rather than public concern. The U.S soon learned that the British government’s main goal was to make the U.S

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s response to a public statement of concern from multiple Southern white religious leaders entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is perhaps one of the most important and influential pieces dedicated to the fight for equality written in the last one hundred years. It is striking just how much of the content within this letter continues to ring true. Numerous arguments King makes are still extremely relevant today, and it is nearly impossible to engage with and reflect on this text without drawing parallels to the current political landscape. This paper will discuss exactly how particular points

The primary goal of a sermon in church is to convince or persuade the congregation to turn to God and follow his ways and beliefs. A sermon is commonly broken up into several subsections beginning with “(1) an introduction ‘to establish a common ground of religious feeling’; (2) ‘a statement of the text’ which is often drawn directly from the Bible; (3) the ‘body of the sermon,’ which consists of repeated emotional climaxes; and (4) the ‘conclusion’ which resolves the emotional tension aroused by the sermon by drawing the sinners to God.” (Pipes 143). Based on these characteristics and King’s religious background and experience as a preacher, it is logical to argue that the structure of “A Letter from the Birmingham Jail” resembles that of a sermon which is aimed at an audience much larger than that of just eight clergymen. Through his brilliant use of persuasive methods and emotional appeal, Martin Luther King turns a simple response to a letter into a national cause for white support to combat segregation.

In 1963, Martin Luther King was confined in Birmingham because of his participation in protesting. During this time, there was segregation which enjoined African Americans from utilizing particular areas or any type of accommodations in all. King wrote a letter in replication to the eight white clergymen that reprehended King 's actions. In the "Letter from Birmingham jail," King bulwarks the lawfulness of protesting, transgressing the law in nonviolent demonstrations against segregation and racism. The major premise of this argument is that all laws that devalue the human disposition are inequitable. The white clergymen who conveyed objection to King 's actions felt that his actions transgressed the law and caused chaos. King argues that the laws of the segregated south are inequitable and should not be accepted or followed. King breaks the difference between God 's laws and discriminatory man-made laws that oppress the Black race and how he is obligated to fight against those types of laws. The more diminutive premises here are that the laws of segregation devalue the ebony man/woman character.

Martin Luther King, Jr.’s mission is to bring forth justice in a society tarnished by injustice. Negro citizens stood by and obeyed the injustice directed towards them by the U.S. government. King refuses to obey the ideals of society and yearns to enlighten Negro citizens to overcome injustice, for they are citizens guaranteed rights by the law. There is opposition to MLK’s mission; eight clergymen believe that King’s work is “unwise and untimely” indicating that patience is the only way to deal with injustice. The clergymen’s ideology regarding civil rights influences Negro citizens to adhere to society’s ideals and obey what King believes are unjust laws. This relationship between King and the clergymen is symbolically represented in Plato’s

Martin Luther King created an archive that might start the defining moment of the Civil Rights development furthermore provides of the battle for genetic equity. King’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail,” aims to defend those who are frantic for peaceful immediate action, the outright shamelessness for unfair laws is very disgraceful and it needed to be exposed for what it really was. Also the expanding likelihood of falling back on amazing confusion and fighting, the utter frustration for those who lie within the chapel who, in King's opinion, required not to live up to their obligations as individuals for the lord. Those activities of the African-American race needed aid and support as the lord required demonstrated in King's Letter. Likewise, King explains, “past promises have been broken by the politicians and merchants of Birmingham and now is the time to fulfill the natural right of all people to be treated equal”. Secondly, King's solution for those clergymen's declarations that separating the law may not be the path to accomplish the effects the African-American is searching for. King feels that the chapel has bypassed its responsibilities to the African-American people, concealing behind “anesthetizing security of stained-glass windows”. King sums up his letter by making a side point that he trusts that the chapel will view its duty and intend as Concerning illustration individuals of the lord and comprehend to have immediate action, those who support unfair/one sided laws and the looming risk of the African-American climbing dependent upon Previously, savagery if they would not listen. King does this all in a diplomatic, ardent

Unlike DiAngelo’s White Privilege essay, a group of religious authorities under the umbrella of Christian Churches Together in the U.S.A. wrote a response letter to Dr. Reverend King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” First quoting a portion of Dr. King’s letter then responding to the quote, the group takes a Biblical stance on the racial issues that continue to preside in modern day American culture. Beginning the essay, the group differentiates between merely acting upon the symptoms of racism. “... (a) superficial kind of social analysis…” and discovering and fixing the root of the racial. By investigating the racial issues at hand and striving towards Dr. King’s dream of a community of equal opportunities for all races, then the conversation of racial inequality can begin. Realizing that fostering a multiracial community centered around radical love that forsakes “safety of our social order,” we, as the Christian body need to develop a society that eliminates the social prejudices currently penetrate into every aspect of

The arrangement embraced by Congress had a few sections: California was conceded as a free state, irritating the harmony that had since quite a while ago won in the Senate; the limit of Texas was settled along its present lines; Texas, as a byproduct of surrendering area it asserted in the Southwest, had $10 million of its difficult obligation accepted by the government; regions surrendered by Texas turned into the perceived regions of New Mexico and Utah, and in neither one of the cases was subjection said, apparently leaving these domains to choose the servitude address all alone by the standard of famous power; the slave exchange, however not bondage itself, was abrogated in the District of Columbia; lastly, Congress passed another and more grounded Fugitive Slave Act, taking the matter of returning runaway slaves out of the control of states and making it an elected duty. The trade off, in any case, contained the seeds of future disagreement. The point of reference of famous power prompted to an interest for a comparative arrangement for the Kansas Territory in 1854, bringing about severity and savagery there (see Bleeding Kansas). Moreover, the utilization of the new Fugitive Slave Act activated such a solid response all through the North that many direct abolitionist components got to be distinctly decided adversaries of any further expansion

In this article, William H. Browne is able to present how crucial and beneficial the Maryland Act Concerning Religion of 1644 was during the religious-political battles of the English Civil War. The article expressed how the act was a huge milestone in the early history of religious freedom in America and how at the time it helped reestablish order in Maryland by institutionalizing the principle of toleration that had prevailed from the colony's beginning. More specifically, the act provided punishment for anyone who "troubled or molested" a Christian for religious reasons which would consequently help establish harmony amongst the different religions of the time. The article goes on to say

In the third document, “Border States Are Alarmed ( 1862), a document cited by George D Prentice a South adopted Connecticut Yankee who spoke on behalf of Kentucky and his unwillingness to the emancipation proclamation who claims that the order is unjust and mischievous, that if carried out shall only be harmful, though admitted it would be helpful against the enemy [South]. Prentice speaks thoroughly on his unwillingness as a representative of Kentucky to take on such an order, he believes it is an act that shall never really be abolished, though attempted. He clings to the fact that Lincoln is just a temporary occupant of the executive chair and is of little worth, that slavery is an institution installed from the “government our fathers framed” which will withstand through the emancipation proclamation. The document ended by Prentice stating that Kentucky would resist the act.