Bill Of Rights Synthesis Essay
“There will never be a really free and enlightened state until the state comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived.” (Thoreau 1849). Peaceful resistance positively impacts a free society in three ways: keeping the Bill of Rights alive, inspiring others to promote change through passive protest, and widening people's perspectives while respecting the law. In a free society, individuals have the privilege to live in a manner of their own choosing, so long as they do not infringe upon the liberty of their peers. The Constitution of the United States possesses the foundation for freedom, particularly in The Bill of Rights. The First Amendment of The Bill of
…show more content…
Therefore, peaceful protests only effectuate change when the participants are lawful and accepting of consequences. Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and Nelson Mandela are examples of participants who used civil disobedience to leave an impression. Gandhi adopted ideas from Henry David Thoreau’s, 'On the Duty of Civil Disobedience', to shape his approach to obstruct corruption. During the Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. constantly promoted peace and justice to the nation, despite the vulnerable position he held. Nelson Mandela also acted upon Thoreau’s ideas when he attempted to end the apartheid in South Africa. Each of these three activists successfully effectuated modifications to their country’s government. However, if participants were to resist legislation without accepting the repercussions, it would promote anarchy. Without legal cooperation, their actions would represent utter lawlessness. The government of a free society is designed to consider its people’s best interests, so why would it be effective to bite the hand that feeds? When individuals do not accept consequences associated with resistance, they obstruct the necessary mutual respect between the individual and the state. Without which the purpose of resistance would be insignificant, as the authority would have no desire to cooperate with the
Therefore, peaceful protests only effectuate change when the participants are lawful and accepting of consequences. Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, and Nelson Mandela are examples of participants who used civil disobedience to leave an impression. Gandhi adopted ideas from Henry David Thoreau’s, 'On the Duty of Civil Disobedience', to shape his approach to obstruct corruption. During the Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. constantly promoted peace and justice to the nation, despite the vulnerable position he held. Nelson Mandela also acted upon Thoreau’s ideas when he attempted to end the apartheid in South Africa. Each of these three activists successfully effectuated modifications to their country’s government. However, if participants were to resist legislation without accepting the repercussions, it would promote anarchy. Without legal cooperation, their actions would represent utter lawlessness. The government of a free society is designed to consider its people’s best interests, so why would it be effective to bite the hand that feeds? When individuals do not accept consequences associated with resistance, they obstruct the necessary mutual respect between the individual and the state. Without which the purpose of resistance would be insignificant, as the authority would have no desire to cooperate with the