The Pros And Cons Of An Unjust Law

In paragraphs 12-14 of “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, Dr. King begins addressing the clergymen’s belief that the peaceful demonstrations conducted by him and his associates were untimely. King starts answering questions frequently heard by opposing or moderate forces, as well as essentially denouncing the resistance to desegregation. King then introduced the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed; concluding that the oppressor is not inclined to act on things that do not directly affect them. Therefore, providing a platform of his argument as to why blacks could no longer wait to be given their basic human rights. Action needed to take place because fair treatment was no longer a hope to be given, it had to be taken.

Martin Luther King Jr. expresses his views for obeying “Just” laws, while disregarding “Unjust” laws because of moral purposes. In the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Dr. King speaks on how he “Urge people to obey laws,” as well as “urge them to disobey segregation ordinances”. “I agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.” Dr. King’s reason for following certain laws and not others is because he believes there are two types of laws. Just laws are beneficial to all races and “Is the man-made code that squares with the moral law or the Law of God”, unjust laws neglects certain human races needs and personalities and “Is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” Dr. King does not disapprove Supreme Court decisions, yet if it involves segregation he feels as though it “Distorts the soul and damages the personality.” Dr. King states, “Segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, it is also morally wrong and sinful.” At this point, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is past describing how segregation affects people, but is now saying how segregation for example affects the political system such as denying Negroes the right to vote. “Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters.” Negroes make up the majority population in the counties of Alabama “Not a single Negro is

King differentiates between just and unjust laws, eliminating any argument as to what his letter is referring to. He quotes St. Thomas Aquinas: “An unjust law is a code that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” By precisely defining the difference between just and unjust laws, King makes it difficult for anyone to refute his argument that segregation is not a law to be followed. King points out that while segregation may be legal, that does not necessarily mean that it is morally right. A majority of legislation passed did not include the votes of minorities, which contradicts the direct foundation of the country, as outlined by the Constitution, something that even the strongest segregationist must respect. King ends his argument with a resonating rhetorical question: “Can any law enacted under [morally wrong] conditions be considered democratically structured?” This question guides readers to the logical conclusion that with segregation, laws passed disregarding the votes of minorities, comes the fall of democracy, a fall with drastic repercussions as a country in which laws are passed to suppress minorities and benefit only the majority is no country at

To further support his analysis of the law, King states a third definition of “an unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because they did not have the unhampered right to vote” (PAR 14). This definition is given to show that there are unjust laws occurring. This implies that the white people are devaluing democracy and what it stands for. He states after that, clearly, Negroes are not allowed to vote in the state of Alabama regardless if they are the minority or not. He is stating that it is unjust for Negroes not to be able to vote. Although these statements do not directly answer the charges of the clergymen, King is building up to that answer. While defining the laws, King is focusing on what he believe is wrong and its relationship with unjust laws. King uses this technique to support breaking unjust laws to obey just laws.

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.

King’s use of many rhetorical devices in these three paragraphs of “Letter from Birmingham Jail” solidify his conviction that segregation needs to be quelled immediately. Dr. King’s explanations justify the demonstrations and protests that he is participating in. Although this was a letter meant for clergymen, Dr. King simultaneously taught all of America a very important lesson: justice is a universal natural right, and when it is denied, it needs to be demanded. Racial equality is the form of justice in this case, as segregation was the culprit that divided society into two racial groups. Thus, Dr. King successfully advocated civil rights through this letter with powerful, clever

King’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, paragraph 13, he says, “Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit…” This is saying how laws may seem just, but can easily be enforced unjustly. They arrested King for having a parade without a permit….. What kind of excuse is that, I’ll tell you, It’s an excuse that someone uses when they want a powerful man in jail because they don’t share the same beliefs. Dr. King was unjustly thrown in jail. In their eyes civil disobedience wasn’t okay, now was it not okay because it was a black man, or just because it was flat out not okay? It’s because he was a black man, if it was some white man the police would have at most given him a warning, if done anything at all. Dr. King was marching for something he believed in, that’s why, King wasn’t upset to be thrown in

African Americans have undergone unimaginable hardships in this land and were powerless to effect change in the system with their vote. I find this to be great injustice. Another example of injustice in this reading is King’s arrest. He writes, “I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance, which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and deny citizens their First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.” As King explains how a just law can become unjust through capricious or malicious application, I find myself confused by the situation. African American citizens are struggling for the equality America was founded on, and these people are being arrested for improper parading. After exhausting many other approaches, African Americans moved to peaceful protest and even that was stifled. I find myself asking where else were they to turn, how else could they effect change, and where is their justice? Would anyone have blamed Dr. King for being angry with his situation? I doubt it. King made a wise choice to remain optimistic, to address those who questioned his motives with reverence. In fact, he defines how he will respond to his critics in the opening paragraph of his letter: “I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.” This statement demonstrates King’s commitment to

As a result of racist laws that forced blacks to be segregated and refused them their right to peacefully protest, Birmingham, Alabama in the 1960’s, was considered the most racist part of the United States and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. worked towards removing segregation laws from being enforced. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. publicly addressed the issue of racism on a religious, political, and social aspect by addressing his letter to the clergymen, disobeying the law through nonviolent civil disobedience, and expressing disappointment when he did not receive support from the white moderate, respectively. Advocating against the extreme racial injustice in Birmingham, Dr. King’s support of St. Augustine’s belief that “an unjust law is no law at all” caused a controversial debate across the country over who has the authority to decide which laws should be disobeyed (King 3). Although Dr. King addressed his letter to the white clergymen, his target audience was to the entire white moderate of the country whom he hoped would help him gain support in order to change unjust laws that promote segregation and refuse citizens of their First Amendment rights to a peaceful protest (King 4). Dr. King was looking for support from other members of society in order to create an effective change in society’s ethics. Moreover, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s large audience and public movement used nonviolent

Martin Luther King uses historical examples to prove his point, using logos which most intellectuals can understand, and then uses examples for any African American can understand. In paragraph 16, King talks about St. Thomas Aquinas and his definition of an unjust law. "Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."(King, Pg.3) In Paragraph 21, "In the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake."(King, Pg.4) He discusses Nebuchadnezzar and how people in that time refused to obey his laws because they were unjust, just as he did in Birmingham. Socrates, the Boston tea party, early Christians who gave their lives for their religion. These historical events gave King an edge in his persuasiveness. Now he isn't just someone who has broken laws, now he is now just like all other famous ancient historical figures. However he also addresses his "Negro brothers" in paragraph 14, when he describes what its like to have to tell your children that they cant go somewhere or do something because they are black, or what it is like to watch as your family is beaten or lynched in front of your eyes. He is directing this at the

When he was arrested and jailed in Birmingham, Alabama he then fell under criticism by white clergy for coming to Birmingham as an “outsider” to cause trouble and increase tension through public sit-ins and marches. I feel that Martin Luther King was able to both set aside that criticism by establishing his credibility to have not only been invited to come to Birmingham to help end the injustice to the Negro people via peaceful means, but he was able to identify moral, legal and ethical cause to promote his quest to put a stop to what he identified as “the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States” (King, 2017, p, 3). I will provide a summary that will show what Martin Luther King believed were the cause of the injustice that he was striving to end to as well as his concern over the white community’s ability to make the Negro “wait for more than three hundred and forty years for our constitutional and God-given rights.”

In 1865, nearly ninety years after the founding of the United States, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, thereby abolishing the “peculiar institution” which had once threatened to end the Great Experiment of American Democracy. Two subsequent amendments, ratified in 1868 and 1870, guaranteed equal protection of the law to all citizens and prohibited the denial of voting rights on the basis of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Yet, close to one hundred years after these three Reconstruction Amendments became the law of the land, racial equality was still something confined to the dreams of visionaries and activists. Writing a letter from Birmingham Jail in Alabama, civil rights leader Martin Luther King

Martin Luther King Jr., was a civil rights activist who spoke freely about civil disobedience in the Letter from Birmingham Jail while he was locked up for civilly disobeying the law. He was writing to eight white clergymen that also felt that many of the laws were unjust, however they showed agreement with Socrates by stating that he should not disobey the laws. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “one has a moral responsibility to disobey just laws because if we did not disobey them then unjust acts would continue to occur, causing our country to be harmed”. He also stated that “an unjust law is no law at all”. Martin Luther King Jr. did believe that laws were setup and enforced to assist and support the residents of the state however, if a law was unfair or unconstitutional, then the law would

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance, which requires a permit for parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest (53).

Not only were many laws changed and created, but even more were broken in an attempt to better our once unjust society. Martin Luther King Jr., arguably the most influential leader of this movement, was an avid supporter of civil disobedience during this era. He participated in countless sit-ins and protests, including the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1956, in which he and almost one hundred other activists were arrested for peacefully protesting discrimination in the Montgomery public transit system. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, written in 1963 after he was arrested for partaking in a nonviolent protest, King offers explanation as to why he practices civil disobedience and what he hopes to achieve in doing so. In this letter, King admits, “In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law…that would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty”. However, he also stated that in this fight, it is necessary to “[stand] up for what is best in the American…thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence”. In his words, civil disobedience is more than ignorance of law; it is just one of the necessary measures that must be taken to restore equality in a