Throughout America's social revolutionary epoch of the 1950s and 1960s, a great “superiority complex” not by economic status, social class, but the simplicity of pigments of the human skin took action. Thus, once a master and his slave, we have a continuity with roles being renamed towards “white” and “colored”. Though, America, a land of immigrants of various tongues and colors, a central focus on a black and white nation. Great leaders in these times lead groups of all different purposes on either side of an issue, whether it be aggressive action, or a peaceful approach. The African American spirit heavily resided in the house of God, a hearth for a voice, through brothers and sisters in reverend. Martin Luther King Jr. was such a voice for
…show more content…
uses historical reflections to condemn white moderates by further identifying the differences in their reactions towards persecution. Dr. King illustrates that these religious figure(s) celebrate early Christians that took a stand to their “persecutors”, but at the same time censure present day Christians taking the exact same approach. Dr. King mentions a brief statement on Communism as well as touching basis on World War II Holocaust by Nazi Germany. As a result, in mentioning of these two historical occurrences King targets his intended audience of refusing to stand up for what is right. King utilizes this by weaving the the Negro struggle in comparison towards the distant past. King elaborates on Nazi Germany by pointing out that every single action “..Hitler did in Germany was legal”, and even briefly mentioning on how Christianity is still persecuted in Communist countries. Despite all of the adversity, Dr. King remains a stance with his “Jewish brothers” and advocated for “disobeying...anti religious laws”, because it is the moral right to approach. In retrospect, Dr. King reminds the clergymen that the Nazi program in Germany was “legal,” while freedom fighters often commit “illegal action.” As previously stated, he argues that he would have broken Hitler’s law and given aid to a Jew had he lived there at that time, and infers that he is acting upon so currently. One can witness the attack here on the clergymen that could not be …show more content…
Due to the fact that Dr. King is writing to religious leaders and scholars, he chooses to quote people they would have read in his letter. King weaves the words of the scholars to not only strengthen but validate the arguments he is constructing as well as condemn ing those who are choosing to stand by and allow unjust things to occur. Dr. King displays toward the religious leaders he quotes as a way of saying what he actually stands for. A prominent example, King has the ability to say that the laws are unjust by using philosopher Thomas Aquinas, “an unjust law is no law at all” is that human laws do not obligate when they bring injury and loss of character on human beings—when they oppress the poor and humble. Oppressive laws, presumably Aquinas taught on, can be described as “perversions” of law, acts of violence; and no one need feel guilty about disobeying an unjust law. Another citation King approaches is the Christian philosopher Paul Tillich, by using Tillich, Dr. King is able to attack segregation. King quotes that if “sin is separation,” then segregation is a terrible sin since it separates men from one another. Therefore, he does not accept that it is hypocritical to urge men to break unjust laws, especially if they are morally wrong - as segregation is. Throughout the letter whenever he wants to make a claim, Martin Luther
uses historical reflections to condemn white moderates by further identifying the differences in their reactions towards persecution. Dr. King illustrates that these religious figure(s) celebrate early Christians that took a stand to their “persecutors”, but at the same time censure present day Christians taking the exact same approach. Dr. King mentions a brief statement on Communism as well as touching basis on World War II Holocaust by Nazi Germany. As a result, in mentioning of these two historical occurrences King targets his intended audience of refusing to stand up for what is right. King utilizes this by weaving the the Negro struggle in comparison towards the distant past. King elaborates on Nazi Germany by pointing out that every single action “..Hitler did in Germany was legal”, and even briefly mentioning on how Christianity is still persecuted in Communist countries. Despite all of the adversity, Dr. King remains a stance with his “Jewish brothers” and advocated for “disobeying...anti religious laws”, because it is the moral right to approach. In retrospect, Dr. King reminds the clergymen that the Nazi program in Germany was “legal,” while freedom fighters often commit “illegal action.” As previously stated, he argues that he would have broken Hitler’s law and given aid to a Jew had he lived there at that time, and infers that he is acting upon so currently. One can witness the attack here on the clergymen that could not be …show more content…
Due to the fact that Dr. King is writing to religious leaders and scholars, he chooses to quote people they would have read in his letter. King weaves the words of the scholars to not only strengthen but validate the arguments he is constructing as well as condemn ing those who are choosing to stand by and allow unjust things to occur. Dr. King displays toward the religious leaders he quotes as a way of saying what he actually stands for. A prominent example, King has the ability to say that the laws are unjust by using philosopher Thomas Aquinas, “an unjust law is no law at all” is that human laws do not obligate when they bring injury and loss of character on human beings—when they oppress the poor and humble. Oppressive laws, presumably Aquinas taught on, can be described as “perversions” of law, acts of violence; and no one need feel guilty about disobeying an unjust law. Another citation King approaches is the Christian philosopher Paul Tillich, by using Tillich, Dr. King is able to attack segregation. King quotes that if “sin is separation,” then segregation is a terrible sin since it separates men from one another. Therefore, he does not accept that it is hypocritical to urge men to break unjust laws, especially if they are morally wrong - as segregation is. Throughout the letter whenever he wants to make a claim, Martin Luther