Just Laws, Unjust Laws, and Theo‐Moral Responsibility in Traditional and Contemporary Civil Rights Activism

Journal of Religious Ethics 46 (4):683-717 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In his 1963 response to an open letter from eight white religious leaders chastising his involvement in Birmingham, Martin Luther King, Jr. explained that civil rights activists’ blatant breaking of some laws while obeying others was the result of two types of laws: just laws and unjust laws. Civil rights activists believed they had a legal responsibility to obey just laws and a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. Today, new civil rights struggles continue to challenge unjust laws that shred the fabric of democracy that America espouses. Drawing upon both the Civil Rights Movement and the contemporary Movement for Black Lives, this article argues that unjust laws and practices must be broken and challenged before a just society is established. It identifies four ethical strategies for social activism: collective work and responsibility, strategic timing and economic disconnection, political mobilization, and faithful perseverance.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,343

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-12-01

Downloads
27 (#864,536)

6 months
3 (#1,061,821)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Religious Ethics and the Spirit of Undomesticated Dissent.Keri Day - 2023 - Journal of Religious Ethics 51 (1):44-65.
Tainted Legacies and the Journal of Religious Ethics.Karen V. Guth - 2024 - Journal of Religious Ethics 51 (4):673-689.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition.John Rawls - 1999 - Harvard University Press.

Add more references