Comparing Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King on Unjust Laws Essay

In todays society, it is often unclear where to draw the line between good morals and effective governwork forcet. It is for this reason that worldly c erstwhilerny times, jurisprudences that are enacted for the good of the people kitty be in direct conflict with a souls scruples. Due to the various struggles that the United States has faced in building a govern manpowert, this topic has been a popular discussion throughout American literature. Although they did non live during the same time, American writers Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther faggot, junior ach wrote about how a person should not follow laws that they count to be immoral.Thoreaus chief(prenominal) concern pertained to the legal existence of slaves and slave-owners, and a century later, King r out against legal segregation in the South. In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King, Jr. shares the same attitude with Henry David Thoreaus work, Civil Disobedience concerning practiced and unjust laws however, they each had different means of executing their beliefs. Both men agree that if a law is unjust, it is ones duty to pick up that law, and do instead what they believe to be right.Thoreau considers that when unjust laws exist, a person has three choices of action obey them, obey them while working to remove them, or transgress them at once. He proposes, It is not a mans dutyto devote himself to the eradication ofeven the most rattling(a) wrong but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, andnot to bedevil it practically his support. (Thoreau 4). Thoreau also ponders whether it is better to decide what is right and wrong by ones own moral sense. He declares, It is not desirable to groom a respect for the law, so much as for the right.The just contract which I have a right to assume, is to do at whatever time what I think right. (Thoreau 1). King, who was a devout clergyman, places ones moral obligations under the eyes of God. He defines a just law a s a man-made code that squares with thelaw of God. (King 177). King and Thoreau believe that the act of going against the law should be done in a passive manner. King explains, Nonviolent direct action seeks to create much(prenominal) a crisis and foster such a tension that a federation which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. (175).These writers also coincide that once someone has broken a law, he or she must be entrusting to accept the consequences, including the possible penalty of imprisonment. In fact, both(prenominal) men spent time in prison for their acts of civil disobedience. Thoreau was sent to put aside after six years of refusing to pay his taxes, due to his opposition to both the Mexican-American War and slavery in America. King was sent to jail for jumper cable several peaceful protests, including a boycott. However, King was imprisoned for much drawn-out than Thoreau, who only spent one day in prison, but was unwillingly ba iled out by his aunt.In fact, it was from jail that King wrote his letter, in an grounds to defend his actions in Birmingham, which he believed to be completely necessary and excusable actions of protest. Both Thoreau and King felt that by going to prison, and bearing with the consequences of their actions, they were circle and therefore strengthening their protests. Thoreau and King were also of the same mind that a law must be value regardless of whether it is just or unjust. King fears that anarchy will result if laws are not respected Thoreau describes that rebellion will be the consequence if laws are not precondition respect.King declares, An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the very highest respect for the law. (King 179). King states his position as one that disagrees with a law, and theref ore goes against it in an endeavour to change it with respect to the politics. Both writers agree that getting rid of the government is not the goal, but rather to change its ways.Thoreau articulates, to speak practically and as a citizenI ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let all man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it. (Thoreau 1). Exercising passive resistance is the land of the title of Thoreaus work, and King presents several examples of civil disobedience in his letter, such as the Boston Tea Party. King himself not only exercises passive resistance, but he provides the procedure to be followed for whatever peaceful campaign.With the exception of Kings added religious beliefs, Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, Jr. shared the same ideas concerning civil disobedience and the ways in which one should deal with just and unjust laws, although they demonstrate d their viewpoints in different ways. Both of these writers believed that any law that was in conflict with a persons conscience should be respected, but still challenged in a passive manner. To elevate this belief, both Thoreau and King practiced it themselves.