Mary Dyer’s claims in The Silencing of Mary Dyer directly supports Martin Luther King Jr.’s statements that had been made 300 years later. King’s statement declares, “An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.” By analyzing and dissecting this, numerous aspects of Mary Dyer’s life and actions could validate the quote. King’s first component of his statement expresses that, “an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice...” Evidence written throughout The Silencing of Mary Dyer helps exemplify this statement. Mary Dyer had not agreed with the Puritan religion. She believed that God spoke to everyone through the urgings of his or her conscience; Puritans thought God only spoke to authorities of the church. Dyer also did not believe that the church should govern all aspects of life in the colony. At first, she kept an uneasy silence. But once a woman, Anne Hutchinson, began publically opposing the church, Dyer decided to step in as well. When …show more content…
Mary Dyer no doubt fits this description. If Dyer had not had such a strong opinion in how Puritans lived, would she speak up? Would she have risked her life to express her thoughts to others? The answer is simply no. Dyer felt strongly in that the way that the Puritans were living was wrong, and instead of keeping quiet she decided to finally take a stand against them, taking an interest in the laws to support herself and gain followers. If you felt strongly about something, would you keep