OPPapers.com

Liberty And Justice For All

“Liberty and Justice for All”
Throughout history there have been times when citizens have had the need, as well as the responsibility, to violate certain societal rules/laws in order to protest against unjust treatment and bring about social or political change. It began as early as Socrates, who disobeyed an unjust decree against teaching his ideas, which led to his being condemned to death; Mahatma Gandhi’s fight against British rule over India; and Rosa Parks refusal to give up her seat on the city bus to make room for more white people, which led to her arrest, followed by the Montgomery Bus Boycott which ultimately led to the desegregation of public buses. The most famous of all cases, however, was the leader of the Civil Rights Movement, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his fight for civil rights for all people. Civil disobedience, though a purposeful violation of one or more of society’s laws, has been used successfully to communicate, as well as change, the unfair, unjust treatment of groups of people within a society.
Civil disobedience is morally justified when it is believed that laws or the interpretations of laws are in violation of the social contract between the government and any of its people. When the social contract is not honored, or an individual or groups rights have been violated, the “agreement” has been broken and therefore civil disobedience is morally justified as a means to express conviction and address an injustice that has been done. Civil disobedience is a non-violent refusal to obey civil laws that have proven to be unjust or unfair. People practicing civil disobedience, do so as a means to call attention to unjust treatment, hoping for change. When the social contract has been violated, by the government for instance, the people who have been wronged are no longer obligated (morally or otherwise) to hold up their end of the social-contract bargain (so to speak).
In order to understand this, I will clarify what is meant...