Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on martin luther king jr and how he tried to make raacial equality
How Martin Luther King influenced the civil rights movement
Martin Luther King and the importance of equality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is a Model of Courage
To be courageous is necessarily connected with feeling personal danger. If no danger exists, no courage is possible. To show true courage, one must be nonviolent. Violence is the last resort of a coward. For one's courage to truly effect a situation, one must convince others to show the same type of courage. The perfect embodiment of moral courage in the face of serious personal danger is Martin Luther King Jr.
King stood up to bigotry through his words and actions. He showed courage without simply thinking that danger may exist, but knowing that danger would exist. He felt that the only way to truly stand up and make a difference is to be punished for just actions. This will inspire followers to show the same impressive courage. Despite nonviolence, King was arrested on a multitude of occasions for breaking the segregation laws of his time period. During one of these arrests, King reflected on his stance in a letter to his fellow clergymen from Birmingham Jail.
"There are two types of laws: there are just and there are unjust laws.. An unjust law is no law at all... So I urge men to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong... One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly... and with a willingness to accept the penalty"
King is saying that to show moral courage one must not only break the unjust laws, but one must also desire to be caught. To break an unjust law and not be punished will not serve to change the law. King took his own words to heart and broke segregation laws whenever possible. He did this while not just in the face of danger, but with danger breathing down his neck. His ability to endure punishment for a just act inspi...
... middle of paper ...
...at they cannot sit idly by just because the injustices of the time do not affect them. One must act to preserve justice for all, even if one is not the target of injustice.
King's moral courage had a profound effect on all those of his time period and in the future. His life and actions have significance for all people, both then and now. King's courage not only changed the world, but his words of many years ago tell people today that the fight is not over. There are people dying due to injustices all over the world. King's words about problems of the past apply to the problems of today. Injustice in the Middle East affects the justice in the life of an average middle income American. Thus, even in death King is able to call us to action. Through openness, nonviolence and a commitment to future justice, King is a model of courage in the face of personal danger.
In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. uses his personal experience to convince others of the importance of revising the segregation laws that were in place during the 1960’s. In paragraphs 13 and 14 in particular, there is a lot of language used to persuade the reader’s opinions and emotions toward King’s argument. He does this not only to convince his fellow clergymen, but to inform others of the reality that African Americans faced in the 60’s. Right away in paragraph 13, King uses irony to give his earlier statements about freedom the sense of urgency that it needs: “For years now, I have heard the word ‘Wait!’. It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity.
He stated that” privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily”. He illustrated that Negroes realize from their bad experience that they need to confront the society by non-violence tension to persuade whites with their rights otherwise, white people can’t perceive what segregation means. In addition, King supported his claim that delayed justice is never attained. King defended his claim of breaking the laws as there are just laws and in–just laws. He explained that the law, which degrades human personality isn’t a law. He mentioned that” all the segregation status are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damage the personality”. King asserted that there is no democratic law when it doesn’t concern with a part of the society. King provided historical support for the in-just law. He referred to what Hitler did with the Jewish community in Germany was a law. However, no one nowadays is doubtful that Hitler’s law was in-just because he persecuted and killed Jews and prevented any one to assist and comfort them. Consequently, he implied that white clergymen should think about what they did with Negroes and help them as their brothers against
Through King’s peaceful protest, he works to find his definition of good life in equality, where peaceful protest can “create a situation. [and] inevitably open the door to negotiation,” (King). However, King’s attempt to overwrite centuries of oppression and rise against unjust laws doesn’t come without its own set of consequences and benefits.... ... middle of paper ...
The purpose of this experiment was to discover the specificity of the enzyme lactase to a spec...
King clears up any idea that he’s just someone who has broken the law for no reason. He does this by saying; “I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” (Para 15) This statement tells us that Dr. King is simply adhering to his moral responsibility by doing as he’s supposed to. He knows that following a one-sided makes no sense, and it would be submitting to evil. He even goes on to quote St. Augustine, declaring that, “an unjust law is no law at all.” (Para 15) Therefore, the segregation laws that were implemented in Birmingham at the time were by St. Augustine’s logic, no law at
Dr. King’s reply to concerns of his willingness to selectively obey and disobey laws can be summed up in his words, “there are just laws, and there are unjust laws” (3). Expounding upon this, King explains that for a law to be inherently just, it must be inherently moral, and conversely, an unjust law is not in accord with the laws of morality. He elaborates by emphatically regarding segregation laws as immoral, and therefore unjust, because, in its allowance of exalting one ‘race,’...
Perhaps one of his most sustained acts was his ability to represent the plight of African American rights while simultaneously portraying a palatable character to White America. In addition to leading various civil disobedience campaigns, he served as the movement’s main “strategist, theorist, and symbol maker” while also becoming the “movement’s chief interpreter to white Americans.” Stewart Burns actually goes so far as to suggest King, early on, realized his destiny was to be both a black Moses, delivering his brothers from the injustice of Jim Crow, as well as a Christ-like figure, offering equal measures of love, compassion, and forgiveness. This of course caused him to be disliked and criticized amongst some of the more nationalist and militant black leaders of the time, but inversely, allowed many Americans to sympathize with the movement’s main goals.
King can be considered influential in his preaching of nonviolent protest during the civil rights movement. King quickly realized that there were two alternatives in the struggle against “the forces of injustice'; (Ansbro, 233): violence or nonviolence. He decided against violence for
...s. In one way, King’s opponents were correct. It may not have been the right time for everyone in America to confront discrimination. It was, however, time for an Innovator to stand strong against the injustices perpetrated against blacks in our country and to use his skills as a persuasive writer and orator to bring the awareness of the cause of civil rights to the attention of the American people. King once said, “There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.” The time was right for King, motivated by his desire for change, to step forward as an Innovator in the cause of civil rights. It was his willingness to fight and risk at the forefront of the civil rights movement that allowed for the changes in the laws and hearts of the people that were to come.
Fighting for equal rights for African Americans and protesting against segregation in the United States showed extreme bravery. To stand up in front of millions of people and speak against the majority of the United States, and risk his life everyday to fight for African American rights takes bravery and passion. On August 28,1963 Martin Luther King stoop up in front of millions of people despite that he was risking assassination and recited the speech that sounded like music to the African Americans ears. (Clark). I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." To say this speech takes true courage, true passion, and true love for not only his family and friends but for the people that have to go to different bathrooms because of the color of their skin. Another way King was brave is he lead the bus boycott. On December 1, 1955 the bus boycott lead by Martin Luther King c...
Only about 30 of the chemicals in marijuana have been studied extensively for their psychoactive effects. Of these delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is known to be the most psychoactive chemical. This chemical is converted into over 60 other psychoactive metabolites by the liver (Carroll 1993). These chemical reactions, however, have either proved insignificant or not enough research has been conducted to prove their importance. Researchers have been mostly concerned with the interaction of THC in the humanbody.
"When they are finally attempted…genetic manipulations will…be done to change a death sentence into a life verdict." In agreeing with this quote by James D. Watson, director of the Human Genome Project, I affirm today’s resolution, "Human genetic engineering is morally justified." I will now present a few definitions. Human genetic engineering is the altering, removal, or addition of genes through genetic processes. Moral is "pertaining to right conduct; ethical." Justified is to be "proper; well-deserved." Therefore, something that is morally justified is ethically beneficial. My value today will be cost-benefit justice. When we examine the benefits that human genetic engineering provides to society, these benefits will outweigh any costs and will thus affirming the resolution will provide for justice. I will now present one observation—the existence of human genetic engineering will not be without limits. Patrick Ferreira, the director of medical genetics at the University of Alabama Hospitals, notes that a "technological imperative [states] that the development of extraordinary powers does not automatically authorize their use." In other words, the point of technology is to be careful, and as with any technology, a society will be meticulous in its understanding of human genetic engineering. I will now present 3 contentions that uphold my value of cost benefit justice.
Genes are, basically, the blueprints of our body which are passed down from generation to generation. Through the exploration of these inherited materials, scientists have ventured into the recent, and rather controversial, field of genetic engineering. It is described as the "artificial modification of the genetic code of a living organism", and involves the "manipulation and alteration of inborn characteristics" by humans (Lanza). Like many other issues, genetic engineering has sparked a heated debate. Some people believe that it has the potential to become the new "miracle tool" of medicine. To others, this new technology borders on the realm of immorality, and is an omen of the danger to come, and are firmly convinced that this human intervention into nature is unethical, and will bring about the destruction of mankind (Lanza).
and explain why we feel such way, many people felt strongly against tap water because of their
Since the beginning of scientific research, the information discovered has led to many technological breakthroughs and advancements at a rapid pace. The velocity of the incoming discoveries may allow one to overlook the powerful emphasis we as humans hold over human life itself. While human research has been developing an understanding of Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) since Friedrich Miescher isolated the double-helix shaped molecule, efforts in recent decades to map the human genome have instigated a great amount of opportunity to the potential manipulation of the basic elements of life. This potential had escalated to a reality by 2001, as the first genetically altered babies had been born and were confirmed by scientists to be genetically altered. These successful operations have sparked a mass overflow of possibility and further technological advancements with regard to human genetic modification (Whitehouse). While there is an enormous amount of potential in human genetic modification, there is an equal amount of controversy that questions the ethics of such practices. For example, should the ability to modify a child’s genetic code be viewed as a technological possibility, or should it be a social obligation to ensure that all children are disease-free? Should it be the parents’ right to modify their unborn child’s genetic code to whatever they wish or see fit? Or should the fetus hold the right to live a life without genetic modification? There are many valid arguments for both positive and negative aspects of human genetic engineering. To make a claim concerning the ethics of human genetic engineering, one must analyze each potential point in order for their opinion to hold validity.