Susan B. Anthony once asked, "Are you going to cater to the whims and prejudices of people who have no intelligent knowledge of what they condemn?" While the answer is seemingly obvious, few individuals have dared to oppose established laws and stand up for their unorthodox beliefs. Raised in an era in which women lacked many basic rights and were considered inferior to men, Susan B. Anthony challenged America’s deeply ingrained social norms of male dominance and advocated for major reform.
On November 5, 1872, she casted her ballot in the national election.
The result: she was arrested.
At the time, women were prohibited from voting, and she was quickly put on trial for doing so. Denied the right of even testifying in her own defense, …show more content…
Examining her motives more closely, though, one discovers the far-reaching implications of her simple actions. Considered one of the most fundamental rights of any citizen, voting is a direct way to voice one’s opinions, and it opens the door to influence government policies. By casting her ballot, Anthony was casting forth the suppressed will of an entire nation and bringing the issue of women’s suffrage to national spotlight. Through her adamant stance and peaceful protest, Susan B. Anthony pioneered efforts for the women’s suffrage movement and paved the path for the Nineteenth Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. Without her effort, women may have never gotten the rights they deserved.
Leafing through more than 200 years of American history reveals that civil disobedience has roots dating back to before the founding of our democratic republic. Beginning with the Stamp Act of 1765, American colonists had openly disobeyed laws that they considered unconstitutional, refusing to oblige to any of Britain’s partisan orders. Standing against all odds, these colonists established one of democracy’s core principle: citizens should actively oppose laws they consider …show more content…
In Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Law Society, Morris Leibman asserts that our unique democratic republic—tested by the pain and suffering, blood and tears of the American people—should not be meddled with, especially in the form of civil disobedience. Once we accept it as an effective channel for change, he argues, we legitimize it for far less appealing causes. Civil disobedience promotes general disobedience. Not only does it threaten established laws, but, apparently, it also jeopardizes our system of order—our free society.
However, what happens if our laws—the so-called “guardians of freedom”—are flawed? What if there exists aspects within our society or government that are inherently unjust? How can the voices of the people be heard?
Ultimately, people should serve as agents for their own freedoms. Our government was created by the people, for the people, and its purpose is not to limit public opinion or any passionate demonstration for change but to positively impact the society. When it comes to securing the rights and freedoms of the people, government legislation may not always suffice. In circumstances in which the voices of the suppressed must be heard, it is their duty to confront such
On November 5, 1872, she casted her ballot in the national election.
The result: she was arrested.
At the time, women were prohibited from voting, and she was quickly put on trial for doing so. Denied the right of even testifying in her own defense, …show more content…
Examining her motives more closely, though, one discovers the far-reaching implications of her simple actions. Considered one of the most fundamental rights of any citizen, voting is a direct way to voice one’s opinions, and it opens the door to influence government policies. By casting her ballot, Anthony was casting forth the suppressed will of an entire nation and bringing the issue of women’s suffrage to national spotlight. Through her adamant stance and peaceful protest, Susan B. Anthony pioneered efforts for the women’s suffrage movement and paved the path for the Nineteenth Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. Without her effort, women may have never gotten the rights they deserved.
Leafing through more than 200 years of American history reveals that civil disobedience has roots dating back to before the founding of our democratic republic. Beginning with the Stamp Act of 1765, American colonists had openly disobeyed laws that they considered unconstitutional, refusing to oblige to any of Britain’s partisan orders. Standing against all odds, these colonists established one of democracy’s core principle: citizens should actively oppose laws they consider …show more content…
In Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Law Society, Morris Leibman asserts that our unique democratic republic—tested by the pain and suffering, blood and tears of the American people—should not be meddled with, especially in the form of civil disobedience. Once we accept it as an effective channel for change, he argues, we legitimize it for far less appealing causes. Civil disobedience promotes general disobedience. Not only does it threaten established laws, but, apparently, it also jeopardizes our system of order—our free society.
However, what happens if our laws—the so-called “guardians of freedom”—are flawed? What if there exists aspects within our society or government that are inherently unjust? How can the voices of the people be heard?
Ultimately, people should serve as agents for their own freedoms. Our government was created by the people, for the people, and its purpose is not to limit public opinion or any passionate demonstration for change but to positively impact the society. When it comes to securing the rights and freedoms of the people, government legislation may not always suffice. In circumstances in which the voices of the suppressed must be heard, it is their duty to confront such