While Dr. King was in the Birmingham jail he wrote a letter responding to the clergymen comments about his movement. The letter was a professional and descriptive reply to all of the clergymen and their blind racism. These rebuttals were effective because they were able to use pathos/ethos and logos to make an effective and persuasive response. One way Martin Luther King responds to the clergymen effectively is through his ability to use logos. For example in paragraph (10) Dr. King has to react to the clergy’s statements, “Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path (10)?” After reading these responses king try’s to appeal to the clergy’s logic through this statement “nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It …show more content…
King has to respond to the clergymen but instead of using logos he uses pathos/ethos to appeal through their emotions. For example in paragraph (39) he has to respond through the statements. “I have heard numerous southern religious leaders admonish their worshipers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, (39)?” Regarding to this statement Dr.King responds with: ‘in deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the church. But be assured that my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the church. How could I do otherwise? (39)’. The meaning of this is too show how Dr.King doesn’t care that the church doesn’t care that the church completely disregard’s his race and consider their problems like nothing; he still loves the church and wants to treat it with respect. This use of pathos/ethos shows the clergy how nice and good natured he is and even through all of this he still is a good person not only making the church look bad but also make him look