And when they broke those rules and were arrested, some people looked at them as brave, noble people doing the right thing. They showed solidarity and support.
Other reacted like this, mocking and making little jokes about these stupid people expecting no consequences and the rules are the rules:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/us-politics.426868/page-579#post-31941945
It's obvious in my eyes beachryan is exactly the type of person MLK was referring to. The conversation shift to the law and rules is just a distraction that hurts the prospects of actual justice.
I'm not sure how much clearer I can be. I was mocking a tweet which tried to suggest the students having to do "reflection papers" was somehow an awful, draconian punishment. That's it. I find that being worried about that ridiculous, in the context of what is actually happening.
I don't even know how to respond to the accusation that I would have been on the other side of the civil rights movement. That feels like a pretty grave insult, but if it makes you somehow feel better, than I'm happy for you.
You clearly read my post on the other thread because you replied to it, but I'll try one more time to make my point, and then you can continue to try and slander me to for reasons I don't grasp:
Let me reduce it to the point I was trying to make: protestors shouldn't have carte blanche. Rules should be made known to them, and if they choose to break them, repercussions should follow. That's it. That's my point.
I don't care what they're protesting. Because my personal views on whatever the issue is in no way whatsoever should impact those protestors' decision to break rules. Similar for a politican's views, the President's views, and so forth.
Protest anything you want. Protest all you want. But your protest is not special, or exempt, or gives you the moral right over other people.
Because if you honestly believe that, the logical next question is simple and terrifying: who gets to say whose rights are okay to infringe upon?