Dr. Martin Luther King And Moral Relativism

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was an American Baptist minister who used his voice and nonviolent demonstration to inspire millions of people in the United States of America to try and end poverty, stop racism, and create peace. Slavery and racism in the United Sates was something that ended in the nineteenth century, however, well into the twentieth century, African Americans’ were still being forced to use separate restrooms and schools as whites. They suffered discrimination and abuse regularly. Dr. King’s appeal to universal human rights was to make an end to the unlawful acts that were being committed, something that I strongly agree with. Like Dr. King I believe that we should be recognized as being created equal and we are all made the same
King was a man who was brought to this earth to preach his message and teach others. When asked if a moral relativist would have the ability to be as persuasive or eloquent as King, it is important to understand what moral relativist believe. According to the Peer Reviewed Academic Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.” (Westacott, n.d., figure g)The way that I interpret this context is essentially that moral relativism is an opinion. There is no right or wrong answer. What is moral in our culture may or may not be moral in another, although, it is still equally important. It is the belief that morals are based on our culture and history. The question to ponder is, how far is a relativist willing to go before they take a stand on human cruelty or the abuse of another human being before placing that abuse under what they call culture? The difference that I see is Martin Luther King wasn’t tolerant of abuse, regardless of who was involved whereas relativist seem to excuse it under
King? Probably not, of course there is the exception, however, a moral relativist opinions are not concrete. I do not believe that they would be able to be as persuasive as Dr. Martin Luther King without the clear moral compass that Dr. King had before becoming a civil rights activist. In order to be persuasive like Dr. King, you must have a clear indication of what is right and what is wrong and why it is that way. Not only was Dr. Kings moral and spiritual compass strong, he was a man who lived the culture he was trying to help break. He was a black man who first handedly saw how race affected his neighbors and schooling, along with how he was directly treated by whites.
Even sense the passing of Martin Luther King, he has continued to impact lives by his message and legacy. His overall significance is something mighty and empowering and something that has continued to impact the lives people today. He wasn’t driven by money, or popularity, he simply wanted what was better for the people. We all rejoice Dr. King for he has forced us to recall our uppermost ideals and come together as a