I am in Birmingham because injustice is here

By the way, this is not an exclusively religious notion. Kant's categorical imperative is the obligation to behave in a way that bothows moral will to intersect with the highest salutary and so discover universal legal philosophy. Kant considers this a moral duty, bridging the bed cover between intuition and action to proactively create as it were a moral universe.

To say that this is the equivalent of major power's taking the justness into his give birth hands or acting as if he were preceding(prenominal) the law is misleading because it implies escaping consequences of disobeying a law. Rather, King confronted the law to assign its deficiencies. Far from escaping consequences, King embraced them.

The question of imposing a personalised worship on others is tiresomely disingenuous. It takes very little imaging to suppose that the statement was originally directed at those in power who sought to impose, by authority, their set on the less(prenominal) powerful. It takes even less imagination to suppose that those who sought to pose over responsibility for their own actions or for the honesty of their perceptions of others' actions could project on others the social guilt associated with attempting to control others. Therefore to accuse King of arbitrarily imposing values on others is to confer on him a moral authority that he neither asseverate nor exercised. Rather, King argues from a position of moral responsibility, demanding only that all act with equal responsibil

ity and that those who ask moral authority justify it. This is the content of his reference to Niebuhr's remonstrate that "groups tend to be more immoral than individuals" and to Augustine's statement that "an unsporting law is no law at all." It is also invariable with Aquinas's insistence that divine law precedes civil law. Therefore, if civil law is unjust, it is unaligned with divine law, which perforce cannot be unjust.

Undoubtedly, King is looking at the church as the moral index of American unconsecrated society, including the landscape of law and justice. If that is so, and if the church is not dedicated to morality or justice, then society and the legal system that frames it will not develop to its greatest potential. King says that a just law "is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God" and that an unjust law "is out(a) of harmony" with moral law. To be sure, King's civil rights leadership put him into the radical forefront of social change. But is that imposing a personal, i.e., idiosyncratic, morality on others? Hardly; it is reorganizing the man-made code (redistri entirelying its patterns of justice) so as to recover social harmony. Further, the vocabulary of the Christian sweetheart imposes the obligation to enact and not just preach the gospel. These were values presumptively shared by King and the clergymen he addressed. The preachers' problem therefore was not that King was imposing his values but that the values he insisted on were Christian values and that he was enacting them visib
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.