First, you must read the article by Martin Luther King, Jr. called "Letter from Birmingham Jail" online under readings]. You must also watch the relevant video (videos 31 and 32). Then consider the following argument from Martin Luther Kin

Philosophy 160
Essay Exam 4
Answer all the following questions in 1000 words. Be sure to answer all parts of each question. Use 11-point Times New Roman font
with double-spacing and 1-inch margins. Do not include the questions, an introduction, or any other irrelevant information. Just
include your answers. These must be completed by 10:00 pm on Saturday night. Points will be deducted for late exams, and if they
are too late, they will not be accepted.
1. First, you must read the article by Martin Luther King, Jr. called "Letter from Birmingham Jail" online under readings]. You must
also watch the relevant video (videos 31 and 32). Then consider the following argument from Martin Luther King, Jr. (note: this
extraction is slightly different from the version in the video).
1. If a law has all four of these features*, then it is unjust.
2. Segregation ordinances have all four of these features.
3. Therefore, segregation ordinances are unjust.
4. If a law is unjust, then it is morally permissible to break it, so long as one does so openly and accepts the legal penalty for
doing so.
5. Therefore, it is morally permissible to break segregation ordinances, so long as one does so openly and accepts the legal
penalty.
• Explain each of the premises one at a time, unpacking his views (lines 1, 2, and 4).
• When explaining line 1, tell which four features King has in mind.
• When explaining line 2, give an example of one of the segregation ordinances that King is talking about (you must
read the article "Letter from Birmingham Jail" to find one).
• When explaining line 4, tell why he thinks this reaction to unjust laws shows "the highest respect for the law."
• Then, evaluate the premises, one at a time (again: lines 1, 2, and 4). Clearly state whether you believe each of these
premises is true or false and why.
• Finally, evaluate the argument as a whole. Is it valid, factually correct, and sound? Explain.
2. Next, the following interpretation of the "unnaturalness" objection to homosexual sex acts.
1. Homosexual sex acts involve using body parts contrary to their proper functions.
2. If homosexual sex acts involve using body parts contrary to their proper functions, then such sex acts are morally wrong.
3. Therefore, homosexual sex acts are morally wrong.