Our nation just celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. Day. One of the greatest works ever written was created by this man on April 16, 1963 in his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail. It was a powerful call to action against injustice rooted in natural law. The subject of the work is an eloquent plea to oppose evil in society, especially those justified by the ‘law.’ An individual’s mind need not wonder at how King would say his message is more important today than ever before.
For some context, King had decided to go to the heart of where there were the most serious acts of injustice resulting from racism in America. The racism was entrenched in the government and among the police. It is an understatement to say Birmingham was a battlefield in many ways. Some had nicknamed the city Bombingham, and despite having over sixty unsolved bombings the police had never arrested a single person. The plight of those living in this area during these times was terrible. King wrote the letter after his arrest due to the injustice of segregation.
So much has changed since then, hasn’t it? Laws promoting segregation due to race have been eliminated. President Obama is evidence that shows how America has come a long way in erasing racial injustice. There are various factors that have led to these changes, but let’s look at the foundation for the moral argument that King makes in his famous Letter.
1. Following St. Augustine, we should break some laws because “An unjust law is no law at all.”
2. Following St. Thomas Aquinas, “an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law.”
3. Following Martin Buber, unjust law is based upon replacing the “I-thou” relationship between person with an “I-it” relationship where the other is demoted from a person to a thing.
King borrows from these great thinkers the foundation for opposing the laws in Birmingham. Natural law is the moral law that God has instituted. Rules enforcing segregation are examples of unjust laws. These laws should be actively broken in a peaceful way. As unjust laws, the mere existence of them constitutes ordinances in society that are morally wrong. Any laws that are morally wrong should be opposed.
Some criticized King for this position. Those that King thought were the worst were those that agreed with King’s conclusion that segregation was wrong, but not his means to remedy this curse. In fact, King blasted the white moderate as hindering the cause of justice almost more than any member of the KKK. He writes:
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time; and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. (Letter from Birmingham Jail)
We hear these lukewarm sentiments in the majority of society. Much of the American church reeks of it. Our politicians bathe in this rancid pool of indifference and inaction to the plight of the suffering.
What is that grave injustice of the day where King’s words most apply to America? What group of people suffers most from mistreatment in our midst? Are there any that need defended against institutional power structures that treat them as things rather than as persons?
The answer should be fairly evident when considering the upcoming anniversary of the Roe V. Wade. In Roe, nine Supreme Court Justices decided human beings in the womb should not be protected from being slaughtered. The ‘thou’ that is in the womb was relegated to an ‘it’ against the evidence of science, theology, and philosophy. The basis for the decision was rooted in a right of privacy. One can assume that none of the Justices would think killing another privately justifies the immoral act. Unfortunately, this logic was lost on the majority in the decision.
I imagine that King would be as furious as many of us were with recent decisions to veto the bill protecting the unborn with a heartbeat in New York and Virginia. The reasoning was that it was not legally sound or sustainable due to existing legislation. It’s easy to point out the parallel with those King lambastes with taking a moderate stance. One would hope the politicians would react differently if they had the courage and knowledge to agree with King’s three conclusions: 1. Unjust laws are not binding. 2. Laws not grounded in natural law are unjust. 3. Treating humans as objects is morally wrong. Just because something is legal does not make it moral (remember that the Supreme Court also decided that Dred Scott did not have human rights). All people should oppose legislation where innocent humans (more than half of whom are female) incapable of defending themselves are killed. Minorities should consider the statistic that although only 12 percent of the U.S. population is Black, in 37% of abortions the victims are black children.
So, in a sea of relativism and lukewarm platitudes from leaders in the church and state, what can we do? I’d recommend every Christian that wants to stand against evil in our nation do two things. First, equip yourself with the tools to make the case for the life of the unborn. The argument can be summarized in the following way: 1. Killing innocent human beings is morally wrong. 2. Abortion kills innocent human beings. It follows from this that abortion is morally wrong. There are many resources that can help you defend both 1 and 2.[1] Second, use your realm of influence to help others see how valuable human lives are being mercilessly slaughtered on the altars of false gods like convenience and choice. This influence can come in different ways- including equipping those at church with this information. One must act on our knowledge to see justice brought to help prevent the 125,000 abortions per day that occur throughout the world. Recognize that you have power and a realm of influence to protect the lives of so many. Let it never be said that in the face of such a grave injustice, we did nothing.
Here is a video where I train people how to share about how to make the case for life and answer the arguments for abortion:
[1]Politically Correct Death by Frank Beckwith, Legislating Morality by Norm Geisler and Frank Turek, We Choose Life edited by Dave Sterrett, In Defense of Life by Fournier and Watkins, and Why Pro-Life by Randy Alcorn are all good resources. Also, Scott Klusendorf is the leading Pro-life apologist in the world in my opinion. Consume all that he offers including his Life Is Best website and DVD series.
Leave a Reply