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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)683-717
Number of pages35
JournalJournal of Religious Ethics
Volume46
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2018

Fingerprint

Civil Rights
Activism
Moral Responsibility
Responsibility
Activists
Martin Luther King
Democracy
Economics
Open Letter
Religious Leaders
Birmingham
Civil Rights Movement
Political Mobilization

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Religious studies

Cite this

@article{1d3a94ae79284a479de9c33d6a1a9f2d,
title = "Just Laws, Unjust Laws, and Theo-Moral Responsibility in Traditional and Contemporary Civil Rights Activism",
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.",
author = "Annemarie Mingo",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jore.12241",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "683--717",
journal = "Journal of Religious Ethics",
issn = "0384-9694",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

Just Laws, Unjust Laws, and Theo-Moral Responsibility in Traditional and Contemporary Civil Rights Activism. / Mingo, Annemarie.

In: Journal of Religious Ethics, Vol. 46, No. 4, 01.12.2018, p. 683-717.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Just Laws, Unjust Laws, and Theo-Moral Responsibility in Traditional and Contemporary Civil Rights Activism

AU - Mingo, Annemarie

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057542065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057542065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jore.12241

DO - 10.1111/jore.12241

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85057542065

VL - 46

SP - 683

EP - 717

JO - Journal of Religious Ethics

JF - Journal of Religious Ethics

SN - 0384-9694

IS - 4

ER -