Just And Unjust Laws Analysis

The call for justice was unquenchable, the tensions in Birmingham starved people for justice and equality, the fight for change was inevitable. Martin had many acts of protest against segregation, after being sent to jail and belittled, he felt compelled to give his explanation and reasoning to the Clergymen that criticized his work. Although Martin’s philosophy was based on nonviolent protest, it was necessary to fight for moral injustice even if that meant breaking the law. In the case of Birmingham, it was vital for Martin to response to the out cries of the people due to the unconstitional behaviors that continued to take place there. Martin focus on 3 central themes; moral obligation over unjust laws, direct action and justification of …show more content…
He provides his interpretations of just and unjust laws and the distinction between them. A just law is characterized by the “moral law, that uplifts human personality,” while an unjust law is sinful and “degrades human personality.” Martin quotes many religious leaders such as St. Augustine and Martin Buber to give to validity to his ideals. Martin believed in what was right in eyes of God, not in the eyes of men. Although breaking laws seems sinful, he had good reasons and he obeyed the “just laws” at the same time. This may seem like a paradox, he insists that there is evident justification that supports his decisions. He believed that if segregation is a sin and law supports it, that law is unjust because it is sinful. This statement is important in dealing with the Clergymen that were considered “moral leaders” that scolded him for “breaking the laws”, when in fact they practiced injustice ways. Martin focuses on fairness and importance over one law and the other. He restates why he was in jail, “parading without a permit” and that he respected that law, but that in his case, he was fighting …show more content…
"You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.” Martin emphasis that the people are left with no other alternative but to take direct action against their oppressors. Direct action incites confrontation without violence. Martin has a more deliberate tone when speaking of direct action, inferring that his actions are priority and needed to be rushed. Well staying purposeful, he makes it clear that “violent tension” is not something he supports but that “constructive non-violent tension which is necessary for