If there is an unjust, immoral or illegal situation, particularly if that situation has been brought about by people chosen to make and uphold law, then is it not only the right but the moral responsibility of even but one citizen to speak out? In a free society, part of that vocalization must always include the option of action in the form of peaceful civil disobedience.

Peaceful civil disobedience does not threaten the safety of anyone. Pounding on a 12-ton, concrete cover of a missile silo with a hammer as three Roman Catholic nuns did in 2002, couldn’t possibly have the slightest chance of disaster or, for that matter, even an acutely minor detrimental effect. It is a statement, pure and simple.

And, should people in a free society feel the necessity to make such a statement, it is one that needs attention paid to it. If ordinary citizens take such actions, something may indeed be seriously wrong.

If you look at any major issue where peaceful civil disobedience has occurred, most of the time a sound percentage of the population has been swayed to sympathy, and with good reason; consider these examples - the free slave movement, the suffragette movement, the several nonviolent labor actions in the 1930s, the civil rights movement, the protest against the wars in Vietnam and more recently Iraq and the disastrous free-trade policies of NAFTA.

Let’s be clear on this point. Those who perform civil disobedience are responsible people. They are mostly hard-working, law-abiding citizens who have come to the realization where the only way they can make a point is to peacefully break a simple law, usually one of trespassing or blocking public access. These people go through great inconvenience trying to bring to light desperate issues.

At times it may even be standing atop a silo that restrains a missile carrying multiple, illegal nuclear war-heads holding a hammer in hand. Or it could be not paying one’s taxes in proportion to the federal budget one believes is truly unjust such as expenditures for unwarranted military actions in another country and redirecting those funds to charitable and/or life sustaining organizations. There should be laws allowing such redirection. As it is now in any tax-redirection-civil-disobedience, the opposite is the case. You get to help out charitable organizations and you get to pay the penalty and interest. No refund.

The point is that everyday people such as you and me risk arrest, fines and incarceration for some very good reasons. It is not an easy choice or a glamorous thing to do. It’s not like you go out on a bender on Friday night and get pulled over for a driving while under the influence violation.

These people have chosen to peacefully yet manifestly bring attention to injustice. The fact that civil disobedience is done peacefully and without threat to anyone’s safety yet at great possible disadvantage to the one performing it should be a clue that something is going on that is in need of scrutiny. In other words, in a free and democratic society such as ours is supposed to be, people performing civil disobedience should be looked upon with a good degree of respect. Remember the Boston Tea Party.

Joe Kissell of Fort Collins humbly admits to never having been a participant in civil disobedience but wholeheartedly supports and thanks those who have courageously done so in the name of justice and peace.

© 2006 The Fort Collins Coloradoan

###