Was it a good thing that people dodged the draft in vietnam, or that rosa parks sat in the front of the bus? Or should we just blindly obey the law becuase its the law?
2007-10-31 10:49:05 · 13 answers · asked by Psychedelic Pantheist 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Wow, alot of anger against vietnam draft dodgers. We must have alot of republicans in this section.
2007-10-31 10:59:33 · update #1
The law should be changed through legislative measures, not by blatantly ignoring the law. Now, in the case of Rosa Parks, if the traditional route is blocked by such extreme obstacles as racism, then it can be justified to break the law.
2007-10-31 10:54:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You do know that Rosa Parks was a plant, right? She was actually the third woman to be chosen for the "job." The first one backed out, the second turned out to be pregnant and it was determined that the pregnancy might shift the focus, and Parks was the third.
I do not bring this up to take away from her boldness or her significance. Just pointing out that there is a difference between a draft dodger and a person who chooses to take the token action to ignite a campaign. I think it confuses the issue when you lump the two types of actions together, because one (Parks) disobeyed the law specifically to help a movement that would change the law, while draft dodgers do not act with the same purpose.
All of that said, your question is unanswerable. It depends on the context of "should."
2007-10-31 10:57:36 · answer #2 · answered by snoopy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A thing little talked about is that a jury can find a law to be unjust and as a result no harm. the Rosa Parks thing is a good example of that.
There are no Republicans left in this country.
2007-10-31 11:07:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You may ethically disobey a law if: 1) it is truly immoral (not just unfair--high taxation for example is unfair, but not immoral) and 2) if you are willing to suffer the penalty without complaint. If either of these do not apply, you are bound to obey the law based on the duty you owe to your country as a citizen or a resident.
2007-10-31 10:55:21 · answer #4 · answered by LoneStar 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We should obey laws. If you think a law is unjust, work to change it. But remember, you may be the only person to think a law is unjust.
We don't have the luxury of obeying only the laws that we like.
2007-10-31 10:55:07 · answer #5 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if it is the law then we have to don't we. If it is unfair or unjust we can challenge it. and yes even if that means breaking the law like Rosa Parks did. Then yeah we break it.
2007-10-31 11:16:54 · answer #6 · answered by Ivy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Had those traitors to the US who cowardly ran to Canada been tried and dealt with along with the seditionists known as hippy's we would be in far better shape as a nation today. You can legally work to change a law but yes the law should be enforced until changed.
2007-10-31 10:56:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately the law and justice can be two very different things.
Sorry I can't comment specificially on Vietnam, as I don't know the history of it.
2007-10-31 10:53:11 · answer #8 · answered by Smokeabella 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, we should not. That is what distinguishes a 'free' society from a 'closed' one. It's good for citizens to challenge the basis of laws, where they come from, why they were implemented... take racial segregation for example, that was law, and it was through hard struggle and protest which brought it down.
2007-10-31 10:56:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You have a right to protest anything you want but we all have to go by the law wether or not we feel it unjust or pay consequences,protesting and trying to change it is fine.
2007-10-31 10:53:56 · answer #10 · answered by wanna know 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋