Conscience Vs Civil Disobedience

1095 Words5 Pages

“Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it”(“Albert..”). This is a quote from Albert Einstein, a man with much wisdom in the history of science and of mankind. He understands that there is always a struggle of the balance between doing what government declares is right and what a person’s morals say is right. Which should have more power over an individual? Whenever a person’s morals clashes against the government laws, they have to decide whether to choose to go with the government or with their conscience. In history, a number of certain people have indeed chosen their conscience over the government, and their choices have helped change the government in a better way. It is appropriate to go against the government as long as there are no intentions of harming any person. In the first place, it is appropriate to go against the government because the government should …show more content…

One cannot deny that going against the majority of the people is something that is unwanted and usually will not benefit the whole nation. Although this is true, I affirm that it is appropriate to go against the government with the intentions of not harming anyone. Majority does not always mean that it is morally right. In the article “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau, he asks, “Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?...Why has every man a conscience, then?” (Thoreau). The decisions of the major part of society can sometimes exacerbate the morals of the nation as a whole. In times like this, there is an obligation to go against the government. As a matter of fact, civil disobedience is especially needed when the majority of decisions and choices are morally wrong and

Open Document