Civil Disobedience

Civil Disobedience Are we ever justified in breaking the law? If so, when? I didn’t do anything wrong, I just broke the law. -Unknown Politician What is the purpose of tension? Why didn’t he give the new administration time to act? The new mayor was a segregationist. . . .I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily . . .We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. (RT, 292/3) But King, you ask others to obey the law ending segregation, how can you then advocate breaking the law? Just Laws Squares with the moral law Uplifts human personality “I-thou” relationship “Sameness made legal”

vs.

Unjust Laws Out of harmony with the moral law Degrades human personality False sense of superiority/inferiority “I-it” relationship “Difference made legal”

An unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because they did not have the unhampered right to vote. (RT, 295) A law may be just on its face, yet unjust in application. If we break the law, then we must do so “openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.” By breaking the law in this fashion and arousing the conscience of the community, we are showing the highest respect for the law. . . .the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. So I have tried to make it clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends. (RT, 297)