If you break the law, you go to jail. You don't get to say "well, I don't like that law, so it's not fair to send me to jail for breaking it."
I've been considering this exact question lately and I was curious to hear Atlas' take on it. Is it acceptable for a person to break the law if they have a moral objection to that law? Aquinas, Cicero, and Ockham said yes. Hobbes said no. As usual I'm inclined to side with Hobbes, but I look forward to some spirited debate.
Ok, I'll bit. I believe in an objective morality grounding in human nature, created by God. Yes, yes, you disagree with that, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.
I believe that it is morally right to break an unjust law. The injustice/immorality is grounded in the natural law system but the same concept would apply the same way to any objective moral system; we'd simply disagree on what the actual answer is. Now, if I break an unjust law (or even a law I erroneously believe to be unjust) that does not mean society has to honor/respect/give legal deference to my opinions. Maybe I'm right and society is wrong; maybe I'm wrong and society is right. But in either case, if the penalty for breaking the unjust law is jail, I should expect to go to jail. Sure it would be nice if my virtuous display of justice swings the public opinion so much they all change their mind and change their laws, but if I am breaking the law, I should expect to be jailed. A major component to why civil disobedience is honorable in the first place is the willingness to suffer for what I believe to be good, not to just expect everyone to hop on board due to my mere presence. Is it unfair to send me to jail for breaking an unjust law? As long as the upholders of the law in society do so in good faith, it's not really unfair for them to imprison me for breaking it. They believe they are in the right, perhaps just as much as I do.
