Martin Luther King Martin Luther King harped on civil disobedience for any moral arguments. Treating citizens differently based on skin color was nefarious, King wished to speak out to change but insisted on non-violent acts to do so. He expressed his thoughts in the “I Have a Dream” speech publically in a passive fashion. This passionate, positive and encouraging speech flourished King’s views and changed the American government’s unjust laws. Although, King did not use destructive force to get his point across, he did break some laws. King refused to take no for answer. He wanted to diminish slavery in America and would take excessive measures to make it happen. Instead of expressing his thoughts through violence, he obtained attention by protesting the Jim Crow Laws in a parade. King was thrown in jail for disobeying a junction that his group was not allowed in. During his time there he wrote a letter to the Birmingham Jail accusing his own people. Regardless who was at fault, it was unconstitutional for the judge to tell this group of African Americans that it was illegal to speak their mind due to the first amendment. In his “I Have a Dream” speech he wrote to the white legislators justifying his actions. He understood that his group was in fact breaking the law. As Socrates portrayed that society should never break laws …show more content…
Despite the African Slaves who’ rights were violated, Locke did not believe they had the right to act out because their lives were not threatened. Locke considers everyone as equal in this aspect, nonetheless, in reality, whites were clearly treated superior to blacks. King and Thomas Hobbes defended opposing views when it came to consideration for others. King was willing to sacrifice his life and spend time in prison so other lives would be enhanced. Hobbes, on the other hand was only concerned with self-interest. King concluded that not speaking up is morally