Dr. Martin Luther King's Letter from the Birmingham Jail was written from jail after he had been arrested for peaceful protest. It is a response to criticism from Southern Ministers about Dr. King's actions. The first part of the letter explains why he was in Birmingham. His two reasons are: that he was asked by the Birmingham chapter of the Southern Christain Leadership Conference to help in a protest, and secondly because injustice existed in Birmingham, and it is wrong to sit by idly when injustice exists. He says that he followed the proper steps for any non-violent campaign: collection of facts to determine injustice, negotiation, self purification, and peaceful protest; he is not in the wrong. King claims that the promises made by white leaders in the past were quickly broken, and that the goal of protest is to force the same leaders to a point where negotiation is the only path in an effort to get demands met.
King then discusses the need for the oppressed to demand their suppressed rights, or else they will never be granted. He then discusses the criticism that he and his protesters do not follow the laws. King's rationalitzation is that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every person has a moral responsibility to follow the just laws and disobey the unjust laws. The difference between a just law and an unjust law is that just laws are in line with God's law, the moral law, and that unjust laws do not follow these laws, but oftentimes infringe upon them. King also says that those who choose to disobey unjust laws must do so lovingly, openly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.
Dr. King then displays in writing his displeasure towards the actions of the "white moderate." This person is the one who is more devoted to order than to justice. They are not in favor of protest because that disrupts order in society. The lack of support displayed by this group is considered by King to be "the Negro's great stumbling block" in his quest for freedom. Later in the letter, King expresses his disappointment in another white group, the church. With only a few exceptions, King has seen little to no activism from the church, whether it be Christain or Jewish, in the fight for justice, and he is disappointed to hear that ministers who do encourage their congregation to support desegregation because it is the law, but none who say to support desegregation because it is morally right.
After diclosing his displeasure to wards the white moderates, King puts forth his idea on the two extremes in the Negro society: complacency and bitterness and hatred. Complacency exists among the people who have lost a desire for self-respect after so many years of oppression and have adjusted to segregation. Bitterness and hatred arose out of the oppression of the black man and the idea that the white man is the devil. These feelings move towards violence, which King is adamantly against. He then states that he tries to stand somewhere in the middle of the two ideals, neither complacent nor full of hatred.
King's final point is to express displeasure towards the support and commendation of the police for keeping "order," but King states that keeping order should not be done with dogs and violence from the police towards the protesters. He talks about how one day the same men who are being attacked and criticised now, will be lauded as heros for a nation.

I agree with what Dr. Martin Luther King wrote, and learned a few things. I was not aware of the lack of support received from the white church and from the white moderates. I had in my mind that the church had been an important support in the struggle for human rights. I agree with Dr. King that lukewarm support is worse than protest, because if a person protests a view, then they at least have a position. This same instance occurs in our world today on several issues. Whether it be war, the president, or your actions, it is important to have a tought-out position, to examine yourself and your life. Only after you have reflected on your position can your opinions be respected. One other interesting note is that King's interpretation of just and unjust laws seemed to be in line with a Catholic interpretation. Laws should follow God's supreme moral law. This idea also made me consider My Lai and whether the orders given to kill were just or unjust. From King's interpretation, I would say that the orders were unjust because they advocated killing the innocent, which is not in line with God's moral law. Men such as Hugh Thompson did the right thing at My Lai by openly refusing to follow the unjust order.