Civil Disobedience Research Paper
Katelyn Mehner
Period 3A
9-27-15
Civil Disobedience Truly Disobedience
“Civil disobedience is a form of protest in which protesters deliberately violate a law” (suber). It is a way for society to reform itself to reflect its current values while maintaining its fundamental ideals. Some may argue civil disobedience is a “slippery slope” leading to anarchy or it cannot be justified in a democracy. Civil disobedience, while not optimum, is a way to accomplish change with the intent of reform and stabilizing communities.
Civil disobedience is one way to stabilize communities. Although some have argued the valid point that if you disobey a law whenever you disapprove of it” it can lead to anarchy, with people ignoring laws. In other words, if nobody follows the laws, what's the point of them? The matter of the fact is, everybody doesn’t disobey laws. If you look around today’s society, most people abide by laws and “while many … may be morally justified in disobeying, few … …show more content…
In the case of Martin Luther King Jr., the institution of the courts was difficult to change. In the article “Civil Disobedience” the author talks about how King’s struggle with the judiciary courts. Biased officials had no reason to change, as they “disobey[ed] desegregation laws without regard to their legitimacy or justice” (Suber). Failing to enforce desegregation laws because the majority didn’t want to change. It was required for the minority to rise up in order to create the necessary change. If the African Americans had gone through the legal system, their requests would have been ignored due to the ignorance of the judges at the time. As Martin said, “Justice delayed... is justice denied” (King). If a government claims to have open channels of communication where laws are easy to change when needed, then civil disobedience should not be necessary
Period 3A
9-27-15
Civil Disobedience Truly Disobedience
“Civil disobedience is a form of protest in which protesters deliberately violate a law” (suber). It is a way for society to reform itself to reflect its current values while maintaining its fundamental ideals. Some may argue civil disobedience is a “slippery slope” leading to anarchy or it cannot be justified in a democracy. Civil disobedience, while not optimum, is a way to accomplish change with the intent of reform and stabilizing communities.
Civil disobedience is one way to stabilize communities. Although some have argued the valid point that if you disobey a law whenever you disapprove of it” it can lead to anarchy, with people ignoring laws. In other words, if nobody follows the laws, what's the point of them? The matter of the fact is, everybody doesn’t disobey laws. If you look around today’s society, most people abide by laws and “while many … may be morally justified in disobeying, few … …show more content…
In the case of Martin Luther King Jr., the institution of the courts was difficult to change. In the article “Civil Disobedience” the author talks about how King’s struggle with the judiciary courts. Biased officials had no reason to change, as they “disobey[ed] desegregation laws without regard to their legitimacy or justice” (Suber). Failing to enforce desegregation laws because the majority didn’t want to change. It was required for the minority to rise up in order to create the necessary change. If the African Americans had gone through the legal system, their requests would have been ignored due to the ignorance of the judges at the time. As Martin said, “Justice delayed... is justice denied” (King). If a government claims to have open channels of communication where laws are easy to change when needed, then civil disobedience should not be necessary