“Equality, what everyone aspires to” The famous words “The end of law is not to abolish or restrict, but to preserve and expand freedom. For in all states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no liberty,” said John Locke, an English philosopher and physician often called the “father of liberalism ". Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.] and On the Adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights implement the concept of freedom. Freedom – an abstract term – has different perspectives that generally depend on the scenario. Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.] has better composition with concise examples compared to Eleanor Roosevelt's speech on the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on 'Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned'? Get the original essay Letter from a Birmingham Prison [King Jr.] becomes motivated by the constant clash between different races, ethnicities and different traditions, by not embracing each other and by not respecting the Constitution, which grants freedoms to all. “Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere…whatever directly affects one individual affects all indirectly” (King, para. 4). Martin Luther King Jr. uses Birmingham as an example when he was on the phone and asked by an individual to "engage in a program of nonviolent direct action if it were deemed necessary" (King, para. 2 ). This implies that the situation of injustice worsens as seconds, minutes, hours and days pass. In order to effectively convey the message of equal rights for African Americans, they must engage in direct action, the last of the four basic steps of any nonviolent campaign. Throughout this speech, MLK uses many types of rhetoric such as analogies, parallelism and repetition, in which case there is an increasing presence of "we", "is not" and "I" . The word "we" correlates with the concept of teamwork while the word "I" correlates with theoretical actions possibly performed by Martin Luther King, Jr. himself, while in office as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Additionally, the word "is not" describes the scenarios one may face due to "people's actions, even if they are peaceful, [because they] must be condemned because they precipitate violence" (King , paragraph 21), thus appealing to emotions. Change cannot be executed by one man and instead requires the effort of a group of people. King also uses the concepts of “just” and “unjust” laws to further strengthen his claim of liberty for all while using parallelism. “A just law is a man-made code that corresponds to the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law...Furthermore, an unjust law is a code that a numerical or powerful majority group imposes on a minority group” (King , paragraphs 12-13). ) . So when MLK describes a just law as one that correlates with God's standards, he is using parallelism and appealing to logic. He demonstrates that the concept of racism in this context cannot be so righteous, because God does not agree with it. Throughout his speech, MLK uses a passionate tone, displaying his concern towards African Americans, the minority group, stating that they do not enjoy freedom asas defined by the Constitution. Conversely, in On the Adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Eleanor Roosevelt presents the The idea of ​​the rights of an individual often differs from that of the rights of a group of people, in that Once an individual decides to be part of a group, a community, a state or even a nation, sacrifice becomes a necessity. we can't have everything we want. This conception of government can be traced back to the Age of Enlightenment at the beginning of the 18th century, when great philosophers such as John Locke appeared. In broader terms, Roosevelt's main assertion includes that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be endorsed and used as the basis of human rights and freedoms. She cites that the Soviet amendments “establish standards that would allow any state to deny virtually all freedom of opinion and expression without violating the article.” He introduces the terms "democratic vision", "democratic systems" [and] "democratic state" (Roosevelt, paragraph 5), which therefore implies that the Soviets do not encourage freedom of choice, and do so with a way which in this case does not violate any law. Throughout her speech, she uses rhetoric similar to that of Martin Luther King Jr., including parallelism, repetition, and pathos to advance her claims. In paragraphs 10 and 11, Roosevelt tends to use parallelism, when she states that "this Universal Declaration of Human Rights may well become the international Magna Carta of all men throughout the world" (Roosevelt, paragraph 11) and “serve as a common standard to be attained by all people of all nations” (Roosevelt, para. 10). The idea of ​​adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) became important as an act of international unity, not bound by moral obligations. Additionally, Roosevelt incorporated the repetition of the word "we" in paragraph 2, in which case she is trying to convey that collectively we can "persuade...[and] eventually [as a group] can succeed [as a best fight is put in place.” forward]…” (Roosevelt, paragraph 2). Throughout his speech, Roosevelt also uses an objective tone, thus displaying his seriousness about the subject at hand and his willingness to see the point of view of others. Martin Luther King Jr and Eleanor Roosevelt both addressed the subject of human rights and believed in the immediate need for action. , however, King's speech consists of a copious amount of rhetoric, thus reinforcing the claim and leading King to present a stronger argument in comparison to Roosevelt. Eleanor does not include enough reasoning to support her goal, to persuade the Assembly to adopt the UDHR, and instead fails, without a sufficient amount of evidence and detail, as she asserts that the UDHR "may well become the Magna Carta international of men everywhere” (Roosevelt, paragraph 11). It can be said that her speech resembles a compare and contrast speech when she begins to mention the concepts of the Declaration and begins to differentiate herself from the Soviet amendments, and therefore she presents a stronger point of view when he s This concerns the UDHR itself. In doing so, she only got the Soviets to "deny all freedom of opinion and expression" (Roosevelt, para. 5) and later used the concept of discrimination to support her claim that the UDHR was subject to numerous provisions, and that it should therefore be accepted and incorporated in the 58 nations present at the meeting. “The fundamental principle of equality and non-discrimination in public employment is valid, but it cannot be accepted without limits”..