The "Need" for Civil Rights
So with yesterday being MLK Day I had it off. I was talking to my dad about MLK and all the things that took place in the fight for equality. He was alive during all of it and (dating myself) I was not. So he was a great source of information regarding the topic.
So in thinking about all of this and how we shower people like MLK, and Rosa Parks with adoration for standing up against society norms and prejudices.
Why did MLK "Need" to organize a million man march? Why did he "Need" to give speeches and sermons pressing for equality? Why did Rosa Parks "Need" to stay in her seat as opposed to giving it to a white man? Why did they "Need" to do anything?
Truth is they didn't. They didn't "Need" to fight for civil rights... They wanted to. But nobody sees it that way nowadays. Nobody thinks the Civil Rights movement wasn't "Needed". Nobody questions why they felt they "Needed" to do anything to challenge the oppression of people of different color as the answer is pretty obvious and self explanatory.
So after a wave of pride of being American swept over me (this happens often) I thought of how grand it was to live in a nation where one doesn't have to rationalize their desire to exercise their human rights as a "Need" in order for the government to recognize and respect it and society to do the same.
Then my thought was interupted by a man on the T.V. asking, "Why does a normal citizen need 30 round magazines or an assault type weapon?"
A smirk came over my face because of how soon people forget and tend to choose which rights are considered a "Need". The same people who would tote how someone who stood up for his rights 50 years ago is a great man, but would look at others standing up for their rights now as crazy right wing extremists... Makes you think...