Welcome to Gaia! ::

If anyone still prowls the ED forums now and then, I'm sure you all have probably come across the thread entitled "Martin Luther King does not deserve a holiday -- Read First Post," Oh, those last three words are so dreaded (does anyone else hate those disclaimers? Well I'm getting off topic...). But in any case, this thread piqued my curiosity and I took a look inside.

In the thread, the author stated that it has been proven that Martin Luther King plagiarized much of his doctoral thesis, and the thread also claims that he Plagiarized on many of his speeches, including the famed "I Have A Dream" speech.

So I decided to do a little research. I would love to show you what I found, but I used Ebscohost, so unless you have an account on that search engine, I can't show you. However, Google and a few of my history teachers backed this up. It turns out that indeed, MLK did plagiarize his dissertation. However, most of my teachers were surprised to hear the idea that he may have plagiarized his speeches as well. And I'm not so sure that it's a fact, since most of the documents I found didn't give much proof but were just full of allegations and boasts about how brave the author was to even try and publish his article.

But for the sake of argument, let's assume that MLK did plagiarize his speeches, including "I Have A Dream." Does he then, deserve his own holiday? No one can deny that he did many great things for the country, but at what cost? Would not overlooking this fact send us back in the fight against racism? Or would it be sending us foward? If we are truly equal in judgement, then all offenders of the sanctity of ideas, writing, etc. should be punished equally. They should each be viewed in the same amount of negative (or neutral) light.

Where should the line be drawn between what a person does for a cause, and what he or she does to achieve it? And where should we draw the line between judging one's moral fibers based on their personal life and their public life? Case and point: Bill Clinton. Shouldn't we still celebrate the good things Clinton did for our country and overlook his personal life that was brought out into the public eye? Or should Clinton also be a role model as the President of the US and thusly be defamed based on the incidents in his private life? Or, do we even have the right to judge these people? It wouldn't matter if Clinton were just the guy down the street from you, but suddenly it does when he's the President of the US? Does that suddenly make it okay to judge him based on his private life?

What do you think about how society judges public officials and other leaders such as MLK? Where do you think the line should be drawn, if at all, between what someone does for their cause and how they go about achieving it?

I'm also curious if anyone here had heard of Martin Luther King plagiarizing before, as well. Yesterday was the first I'd ever heard of it.

I suppose so. I don't mean to get at whether or not he deserves a holiday, but more ask the question how much respect does he truly deserve? Yes, speeches are just speeches, and actions speak louder than words and all that jazz. But in all honesty, speeches were kind of the crux of his campaign. So if he did plagiarize on his speeches, then should we really hold him in all the glory and respect that his image has come to be? Maybe it's my upbringing, but I find it really hard to just overlook plagiarism.