For instance, a just law by definition of Dr.King is a law that makes a person feel gratified. King with passionately states, “Any law that uplifts human personality is just...”(King, 4). This is incorrect because people can’t just make laws that make one person feel good, that in no way is universal. To ensure the greater good of humanity, people must think logistically. Another example is when King also states that a just law holds up are in accord with what God thinks is correct. The author religiously stated, “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God...” (King, 5). Religion is not universal nor is the meaning god therefore that is unable to be a sustainable in the eyes of the law. Also morals are not the same for all people, morals change and evolve through people’s experiences and upbringings. As a result morals can’t be used to judge laws because then everyone's perception of the law would not be the same.. In essence the methods that King uses to determine just and unjust laws cannot be used universally and is not based on logic making them biased. King uses illogical moral compasses and past examples of followers of the laws to assert his definition of just and unjust law. King does not acknowledge that what is considered morally correct is decided by the person who is judging the act. Altogether morality is not a correct way to judge just and unjust laws as it in