RUNNING HEAD: Luther’s 95 Theses Luther’s 95 Theses HIST 101 Western Civilizations Instructor: Dorothy Slane Leslie Brooks October 2, 2011, Thesis In the 95 Thesis Luther is basically discussing his disappointment with the Catholic Church. He did not approve of the way the pope was granting partial remission of time to be spent in purgatory or any other consequences that may be given to the people because of a sin they have committed. The church was basically practicing in the selling of indulgences when they did not have the right to remit and penance for any sin or guilt. That was the sole job of their God and no one else could produce that right or charge for a right that they do not even possess. Luther was also disappointed in man and felt that they should take the consequences that go with their sins and hope that these lessons could be taught to them before it would become too late.
Proctor tried to protect his wife from this and Hester tried to protect Dimsdale’s name; unfortunately they were both punished for it. John and Hester still have their differences. One difference was how they were punished for their sin. Proctor was condemned to death for his sin and Hester was put on a public scaffold for her sin. Also Hester’s name was known thru the town to have committed adultery.
As he defines the answer to the clergymen’s is that a law was unethical so does not considers as a law, because the law is made to guard the citizens not to penalize them. The past has presented what if people were overlooked they will turn into violent protest for their rights. So overall the obstruction of what King handled was with the church, because his
Atheist may feel their punishment is complete once they served their sentence, but since Christians believe taking someone’s life is committing a sin; they therefore question the likelihood of their soul entering into heaven. This principle held by Christians lays a greater feeling of sorrow for their decisions. Many people have been raised upon the idea of what is right or wrong, but it is evident that not everyone can come to an agreeable term. The religious and nonreligious laws have affected the decisions one would make. Yet, the history of a person’s background will determine the feelings they have towards their own
Danforth thinks Corey “must understand, [sir] that a person is either with this court or he must be counted against it. There will be no road between”, due to the fact that Salem at the time was a theocratic society, we can infer that the religious people in Salem only believe what’s in the bible therefore don’t trust the rest of the world allowing the church to manipulate the laws and the people. The noun “Person” suggests the
Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” I would agree with St. Augustine, "an unjust law is no law at all." Martin Luther King brings up examples of how Christians broke the law when it went against the laws of the church and pertains it to the situation that he is in. Dr. King’s main argument to those who have written to him is that they do not really understand the situation. From their view, it seems as though he is being radical with his actions when he leads demonstrations or sit-ins or other things of that nature. Dr. King explains that they are not there witnessing the injustices that are taking place, not only against him, but also against all people who share his color.
One of the Puritan ladies in the crowd suggests that Hestor has “brought shame upon us all, and ought to die. Is there no law for it? Truly there is, both in scripture and statute book.” The Puritans wish further torture on Hestor, even though they themselves too have committed similar crimes. But in looking for a reason to bring more harm to Hestor, they break a commandment worse than Hestor’s; using the Lord’s name in vain. Just for their own satisfaction they look to manipulate the writings of their
At least, if someone did, that person never got enough support to make any type of change. Their system of justice came directly from their religion. Therefore, the people had to deal with laws that were rather strict and favored certain members of society more than others. Had the people questioned this system, they could have made a code that was fair to all and not as harsh. Unfortunately, the people of Mesopotamia never challenged their way of thinking and had to deal with the harshness of the Code.
If there were no government, there would be absolute chaos, and even more horrible things would go on because there would also be no consequences. Government keeps order and is a good thing to obey, but is there ever a time we should disobey? We should disobey the government when it goes against Gods law. God is the Almighty, and when someone goes against him, the Christians should not follow that example but should create their own.
A person does not need to read a lot of books, study the Bible, or live a long life to gain the wisdom and knowledge to know that torturing a captured, defenseless human being is completely wrong. Naturally, the American people must know that the practice of torture is absolutely wrong. Torturing other human beings, even our own mortal enemies, is conduct that is the antithesis of American morale and value. A further reason why the Untied States should ban the torture of captured enemy combatants is because such practice is inconsistent with international law, and is consistent with various treaties that the United States has entered into with foreign countries. Specifically, the Geneva Convention, which is a treaty made and entered by most civilized counties in the world since 1864, and revised and expanded thereafter.