Argument Against Civil Disobedience

Good Essays
Freedom could not exist without laws. Without laws, there would be no public education, no food safety regulations, no speeding limits, no way to run a business, no way to stop discrimination, and no way to have any fundamental rights guaranteed. Laws allow all people to be safe and have the same rights, despite their gender, sexual orientation, age, race, social status, and beliefs/values. Living in the United States, allows citizens to select officials to govern our country. Having a Democracy, gives us the convenience to not have to vote on every issue; yet, still allows the country to be governed by its people. In the sources," Civil Disobedience", by Henry David Thoreau and, “Arguments Against Civil Disobedience," by Carl Cohen, display…show more content…
Civil disobedience influences society when it is made to improve quality of life verses hurt someone or something. When Rosa Parks broke the law by sitting in the front of the bus, it did not hurt anyone, it just offended people who believed in African Americans and white being "separate but equal"; in other words, this is a prime example of a good use of civil disobedience. Rosa Parks broke the law, but influenced the law to change for the better of society. “The Case against Civil Disobedience” describes how one should not obey the law because it is the law; although, it is better to do that then break the law simply to break it; in other words, one may sneak out because they believe the rule of curfew is dumb but to argue that they broke it just because it is a rule would give the argument less support. Laws are put into place by the official’s citizens elect, therefore, if a law seems unrationed then odds are the Supreme court will rule it out anyways. It took the Supreme Court several years to make gay marriage legal, but they made it legal because it discriminated against the LBGTQ community. If a person of LBGTQ community chose to marry illegally that would have been a reason to go against what the law said, because it was an unjust law and it stands up for equality for
Get Access