Title
Although laws are rules society is suppose to abide by, which the government makes and enforces, doesn’t mean they are just. We see this in Wine of Astonishment, when the Crown creates a ban to restrict Spiritual Baptists from worshipping in their community. This ban is socially unjust because it takes away a privilege. Ivan Morton, a member of the Baptist congregation, eventually becomes elected as a political leader because of the church’s efforts. He doesn’t fulfill his promise in helping to get the ban lifted, instead he stands behind the Crown and supports the ban. Ivan unjustly manipulated the people to get what he wanted by not following through with his promise. Ivan Morton treats people socially unjust as a political leader and …show more content…
He uses his community to reap a political title and then doesn’t support them in any way. Social justice is the concept of societal fairness for all as far as wealth, experience, opportunities, and privileges. Hammurabi’s Codes are an example of how people are treated socially unjust even though there is a law in place. The codes were written in a completely different time period and they consist of incest, considering women to be looked at as a piece of “property”, and many other immoral things (128th law). At that point in time, things were different, and it was a law, but just because it was a law doesn’t mean that the rules were socially just. Not only were the laws socially unjust in that time period, it is a continuous problem today. As far as formal justice, Hammurabi’s Codes were formally just. Formal justice is the application of laws and making sure they are followed. When Ivan becomes a political leader, he embodies this concept, he follows all of the laws. These laws put in place that are supposed to be followed but are not socially just are displayed in Radley Balko’s article written about municipalities focused on making a profit from the impoverished. He talks about multiple other occasions where the government creates laws that restrict people from everyday actions. Like Hammurabi's codes, the government today creates laws that people have to follow but aren’t fair on a social level. …show more content…
He let the officers continue on doing their jobs. Ivan isn’t a bad person, he just doesn’t reciprocate what other people did for him. His motives were only out for himself. Power was what was important to him and he treated people unjust to get just that. Once he switched denominations of faith and affiliates himself with politics, he begins to treat his former church community hastily. At one point, Ivan says, “We can’t change our colour, Dorcus, but we can change our attitude. We can’t be white, but we can act white (Page 68).” Morton lost touch with his roots and gave up on supporting the Baptist religion because he cared about power rather than treating people fair. One could argue that because Ivan is a political leader, he needed to uphold his own duties in not fighting the law. But because Ivan was raised by he congregation, out of respect, he should have stood up for them. He would’ve rather conformed to the white ways than fighting for his own people. This was the easy way out for
Although laws are rules society is suppose to abide by, which the government makes and enforces, doesn’t mean they are just. We see this in Wine of Astonishment, when the Crown creates a ban to restrict Spiritual Baptists from worshipping in their community. This ban is socially unjust because it takes away a privilege. Ivan Morton, a member of the Baptist congregation, eventually becomes elected as a political leader because of the church’s efforts. He doesn’t fulfill his promise in helping to get the ban lifted, instead he stands behind the Crown and supports the ban. Ivan unjustly manipulated the people to get what he wanted by not following through with his promise. Ivan Morton treats people socially unjust as a political leader and …show more content…
He uses his community to reap a political title and then doesn’t support them in any way. Social justice is the concept of societal fairness for all as far as wealth, experience, opportunities, and privileges. Hammurabi’s Codes are an example of how people are treated socially unjust even though there is a law in place. The codes were written in a completely different time period and they consist of incest, considering women to be looked at as a piece of “property”, and many other immoral things (128th law). At that point in time, things were different, and it was a law, but just because it was a law doesn’t mean that the rules were socially just. Not only were the laws socially unjust in that time period, it is a continuous problem today. As far as formal justice, Hammurabi’s Codes were formally just. Formal justice is the application of laws and making sure they are followed. When Ivan becomes a political leader, he embodies this concept, he follows all of the laws. These laws put in place that are supposed to be followed but are not socially just are displayed in Radley Balko’s article written about municipalities focused on making a profit from the impoverished. He talks about multiple other occasions where the government creates laws that restrict people from everyday actions. Like Hammurabi's codes, the government today creates laws that people have to follow but aren’t fair on a social level. …show more content…
He let the officers continue on doing their jobs. Ivan isn’t a bad person, he just doesn’t reciprocate what other people did for him. His motives were only out for himself. Power was what was important to him and he treated people unjust to get just that. Once he switched denominations of faith and affiliates himself with politics, he begins to treat his former church community hastily. At one point, Ivan says, “We can’t change our colour, Dorcus, but we can change our attitude. We can’t be white, but we can act white (Page 68).” Morton lost touch with his roots and gave up on supporting the Baptist religion because he cared about power rather than treating people fair. One could argue that because Ivan is a political leader, he needed to uphold his own duties in not fighting the law. But because Ivan was raised by he congregation, out of respect, he should have stood up for them. He would’ve rather conformed to the white ways than fighting for his own people. This was the easy way out for