A Critique of Martin Luther Ki

A Critique of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Version of Natural Law Theory

Paradoxically, Martin Luther King, Jr., in his "Letter from Birmingham City Jail," initially uses classical natural law theory to defend his actions, but immediately thereafter contradicts a fundamental tenet of this theory and relies on a "weaker" version of natural law. In doing so, King must attempt to formulate a theory which justifies his illegal actions in view of his moral obligation to obey the law. King's failure to distinguish between legal obligations and moral obligations yields a logical paradox in his final formulation of natural law theory. However, King's theory need not be completely rejected if his argument is slightly modified to reject the moral obligation to obey laws.

King initially uses classical natural law theory as his rational basis to defend his actions. This theory has two main component claims according to Murphy and Coleman (Sourcebook, I-35), the first being, "Moral validity is a logically necessary condition for legal validity- an unjust or immoral law being no law at all" followed by, "The moral order is a part of the natural order-

. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Scalia King, Alf Ross, Murphy Coleman, St Augustine, Consider King's, Basically Hart, City Jail, Luther King's, Coleman Moral, Education Barnette, natural law, law theory, natural law theory, moral obligation, legal obligations, unjust law, unjust laws, moral obligations, law law, version natural law, version natural, moral responsibility, classical natural law, created fair processes, moral obligation obey,
Approximate Word count = 2963
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)