ipl-logo

Dr. King's Impact On A Free Society

786 Words4 Pages

Dr. King sat languishing in jail. He had broken the law. He sought change through civil disobedience to laws he considered unjust and accepted the consequences of breaking those law. Civil disobedience like Dr. King's positively impacts a free society for several reasons. First, a free society requires just laws. Next, peaceful disobedience allows freedom to be kept in the midst of injustice. Lastly, there are many examples of peaceful resistance which have positively affected our society. First, a free society requires the whole of Law and the justness of individual laws. A free society can be defined with an examination of civil liberty. According to E.C.Wines: The fundamental idea of [Civil liberty] is that of protection in the …show more content…

The system of Law is necessary; however, an individual law may be detrimental to freedom. If a law is unjust, it dismantles human dignity, which in turn impedes freedom (King Jr., par. 13). Thus, it could be said that a free society hangs on the restraint of the system of Law and the justness of each individual law. Next, peaceful disobedience allows freedom to be kept in the midst of injustice. Within the bounds of Law, freedom is fostered; thus, a respect for the Law must also be fostered. When choosing to resist and disobey a law, one must still have a respect for the whole of the Law system. Peaceful disobedience allows for this respect. If this respect for the Law is lacking, then the very freedom demanded is encroached upon. For example, those who were destroying private property during President Trump's inauguration had a general disrespect for the Law and government. In order for the system of Law to be respected, though, only unjust laws may be opposed. A law must be truly unjust when protested to keep the freedom and human dignity that the opposer demands. When injustice is righted, a reverence for the system of Law is promoted. If the law questioned is just, then unnecessary doubt is cast upon the whole of Law that cannot be righted. Every step must be taken to bring attention to the injustice of a law before the law is broken. Broken laws also bring about doubt. When a law is broken the only way to keep the respect of the whole of Law is to respect the consequences that breaking a law

Show More
Related
900 Words | 4 Pages

The obligation to obey the law is foundational to any functional society. Whether morality ever permits us to disobey the law remains a contentious debate. Some argue that morality may require us to defy unjust laws, prompting us to examine when we must obey the law and when we are justified in disregarding it. As Martin Luther King Jr. once stated, "One has not only a legal and moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

Read More
432 Words | 2 Pages

“I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘An unjust law is no law at all’(Dr King 2). An unjust law, something not rooted in the morals of people or God can not possibly be expected to be followed. This is how he separates right from wrong. He sees it fit to break an unjust law for they exist simple to keep things how they are and hold people back from change. When change is exactly what you are trying to accomplish you must not bend to unjust laws in order to succeed in your efforts.

Read More
575 Words | 3 Pages

If a law is unjust, we need to understand that it is okay to break it. For example, King describes to us some situations where past laws were unjust, “We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was ‘illegal’” (4). Throughout history, these laws have been broken and overcome. People will act against something they believe is wrong; it is a consequence of a marginalized group in a democratic society.

Read More
548 Words | 3 Pages

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society because it helps get people's points across, without breaking any rules. People are allowed to voice there opinion, without causing any physical harm to themselves, or anyone around them. Many equal right came about during peaceful resistances. Thomas Jefferson is an example of that. He led a revolution, and changed the lives of millions of African Americans, then and now.

Read More
648 Words | 3 Pages

Political activists and philosophers alike have a challenging task of determining the conditions under which citizens are morally entitled to go against the law. Socrates and Martin Luther King, Jr. had different opinions on the obligation of the citizens in a society to obey the law. Although they were willing to accept the legal punishment, King believed that there are clear and definable circumstances where it would be appropriate, and sometimes mandatory, to purposely disobey unjust laws. Socrates did not. Socrates obeyed what he considered to be an unjust verdict because he believed that it was his obligation, as a citizen of Athens, to persuade or obey its Laws, no matter how dire the consequences.

Read More
616 Words | 3 Pages

Peaceful resistance to laws allows average citizens to have a voice and advocate for change which positively impacts a free society. Up

Read More
508 Words | 3 Pages

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because sometimes it is the only thing we can do, it abolishes unjust laws, and draws attention to the issue. Martin Luther King is someone who practiced civil disobedience to it's greatest effect. If it weren't for his bravery and passion to rebel against the law and fight for equality, would anything have changed? His persistence corrected a huge injustice during a period of time when he wasn't taken seriously by a majority of the population. Martin Luther King Jr once said "One

Read More
508 Words | 3 Pages

Peaceful resistance to certain laws has a very important and an overall positive impact on our nation’s society. Without any resistance to laws that can be bent without causing any major harm at all, the people within a society would start to feel controlled by their government and would most likely begin to revolt, causing bigger problems than a few rebels that at the most, cause a bit of controversy. There have been many instances of these resistances all throughout our country’s history such as legendary boxer and activist Muhammed Ali evading the draft of American men to the army to fight in the Vietnam War in 1967 and Edward Joseph Snowden, a former American central intelligence agency employee and also a former contractor for the United States, leaking unbelievable secrets of

Read More
1111 Words | 5 Pages

In the Crito by Plato, Socrates argues against civil disobedience, seeing it as an unjust act. Contrasting this view, Martin Luther King argues for civil disobedience against unjust laws, and seeing it as a responsibility of citizens. Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain law, commands or requests of the government. I will argue that the view of Socrates is superior to the view of Martin Luther King on the justness of civil disobedience. Using the argument against harm, I will show that even if a law is viewed as unjust, you must not repay an evil with another evil, as evident in the Crito while contrary to ideas presented by MLK.

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

The contrasting beliefs voiced by Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates emphasize the logical flaws in following established principles and opposing unjust laws in the pursuit of justice. King believed that it is our responsibility as individuals to interpret the law in a manner that takes into account its moral justness (King 94). Conversely, Socrates thought that as members of society, the norms and regulations we had lived by our entire lives should not be disobeyed under any circumstances (Plato 49b). In this paper, I side with King's point of view and reinforce his reasoning by arguing that any law or principle can be broken provided the individual can morally justify their actions. Ultimately, rules provide stability in our society, however

Read More
520 Words | 3 Pages

Through our nation's history we have seen many acts of civil disobedience. Most of these acts have come as a response to the cruel treatment of minorities in the United States. I believe that peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is a prime example of the positive power of civil disobedience. Dr. King impacted this country largely with the work of his peaceful resistance.

Read More
799 Words | 4 Pages

After Donald Trump was elected President, there was immediate outcry from those opposed to Trump. Responses ranged from social media rants to actual violent protests across many American cities. This brings up the point of what truly differentiates “peaceful” from “non peaceful.” Civil disobedience can be defined as breaking the law, but not in a harmful way. This disobedience is a resistance to laws, but not a resistance to the discipline that follows.

Read More
588 Words | 3 Pages

Peaceful resistance has a positive impact on society but it can inspire other to be violent when demands are not met. There have been many cases of riots breaking out during intended peaceful protests due to ignorance and rising emotions. The riots that occurred in Charlotte North Carolina are example of how peaceful resistance can negatively impact a free society as it allows people to have

Read More
1666 Words | 7 Pages

King addresses the characteristics of unjust laws in 3 points. First point being that just laws are always harmonious with natural morale law. Second point being that a just law is one that uplifts human personality as opposed to degrading human personality. Lastly, a just law can only be created in the most democratic manner possible and if it is not, the minority automatically has the right to disobey the law because they had no say in the creation of the law. As for the first point, a natural morale law must be measured by our natural human sense.

Read More
833 Words | 4 Pages

In recent decades, billions of dollars have been spent by the World Bank and other development agencies on developing the rule of law around the world—however with limited and relatively low success rates. To explain it precisely, the principle is that no one is above the law. The principle is intended to be a protection against arbitrary governance, whether by a dictator or by oligarchy. Thus, the rule of law is hostile both to monarchy and to anarchy.

Read More

More about Dr. King's Impact On A Free Society

Related Topics

Open Document