Civil disobedience is an appropriate weapon in the fight for justice

This is a debate on CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE don't make into a debate about something else alright? I believe this for the following three reasons: 1.Bring stability to a society 2.Democratic governments accommodate civil disobedience 3.Civil disobedience brings immediate attention to an unjust law For my first point is that civil disobedience is a beneficial behavior in bringing about stability to a society. I would like to point out a few examples such as the Women's Suffrage movement from 1848 to 1920; it acquired the women's right to vote. In Germany 1982-1986, there was a non-violent protest against deployment of Pershing II and Cruise Missiles, 3000 people sat in front of Mutlangen a military base. These people blocked military traffic that goes in and out of the base. After the four year protest the INF Treaty was signed it regulated all land base intermediate range nuclear forces, it marked the end of the Cold War and led to the demise of the Warsaw Pact. Governments have been improved by acts of civil disobedience like the examples I have just stated, this is important because if there is an unjust law or policy or an act that is in a government that the people feel need changing then a citizen can fight for what they believe in. And in democratic governments groups and individuals have utilized civil disobedience as a weapon in the fight for justice that has gained rights, created countries, changed social norms, and improved or saved millions lives. My second point that democratic governments provide for and accommodate acts of civil disobedience I would like to use an example in the late 1960s. Two students John and Mary Beth Tinker in Des Moines Iowa were protesting against the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands. This was against the policies and rules of the public school; this is an act of civil disobedience. They were suspended until they returned to school without the armbands. The parents of the students filed a lawsuit; the case was a tied vote at the district court and was appealed to the Supreme Court. In 1969 the Supreme Court ruled in favor of John and Mary Beth Tinker and validation their civil disobedience by a 7-2 decision. This example shows that America, the greatest example of a democracy allows for and accommodates acts of involving civil disobedience. Democracies allow levels of dispute in a society, such as protesting or assemblies or conventions and civil disobedience. Governments allow this because it corrects problems and mistakes in laws that have been made, and makes their society better. To my third and final point that civil disobedience brings immediate attention to an unjust law. If a person writes a letter or sends an E-mail to a senator it has to go through secretaries, then maybe to the senator then maybe bring attention to the problem then maybe the problem will be addressed then maybe to a bill then maybe a law. This method of trying to bring justice is not effective, nor efficient. However civil disobedience brings immediate attention to a problem or unjust law. It gets media coverage it gets people excited and care about the issue. That then puts pressure on representatives to quickly address the issue, to look at the problem and rethink what is the correct way. This will correct the unjust law quicker and make society that much better for its citizens. In conclusion the people who are being civilly disobedient are not just fighting for a petty cause or just being rebellious they are fighting for Justice, for what is just, fair, and equitable in that society and that is why you should vote in affirmation of this topic. Thank You