Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. never met, but they did have common ideas about civil disobedience. Thoreau went to jail when he refused to pay a poll tax and King went to jail when he marched in Birmingham to protest the injustice there towards African Americans. While they were in jail, they wrote letters on why they chose to be disobedient. In their letters, they wrote for different audiences. Thoreau's letter went to the general public and was about how they should rise up when they feel strongly about an injustice. While King's letter went to other clergymen that had written to him about how he was wrong to go on the march. Even though their letters had different audiences, they had the same theme. They wanted people to …show more content…
Emotional and ethical appeals were used by Thoreau more, and King used mostly logical appeals. This is shown when Thoreau wrote "I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward" and also when he expressed "the only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right." On the other hand, King showed his logical writing when he stated that Birmingham was known for its brutality towards African Americans, that they were treated unfairly in the Birmingham courts and that Birmingham had more unsolved bombings of African American homes and churches than any other city. King and Thoreau also stated that, as King put it, "privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily." Their readers needed to protest things that they felt were unjust and immoral. Both agreed that when people do decide to be disobedient, that they should also be willing to face the consequences of their actions. King felt others "cannot sit idly by