The perspective of this photograph is correct, philosophically speaking. The law, which is symbolized, here, by the US Capitol Building, is placed in subjection to Dr. King’s philosophy of Natural Law, which is symbolized, here, by (both) Dr. King’s words and image.
Unfortunately, Washington has things the other way around: Dr. King’s (and America’s) philosophy of Natural Law is placed in subjection to Positive Law (i.e., the wills of lawmakers on Capitol Hill).
I’ve written, extensively, on this subject before, and I will not rewrite what I’ve already written here. Suffice it to say that Natural Law trumps Positive Law; Natural Law is much more helpful in constructing—legally and philosophically—a more just society anyway.
And this (i.e., Natural Law) is no new idea either. It’s only been around for the past 2,000 years or so . . .
In short, if it’s good enough for Dr. King, it’s good enough for me too.
In fact, Dr. King’s entire philosophy is dependent upon Natural Law; and for one to deny the existence of Natural Law would be tantamount to denying the philosophical justification underlying Dr. King’s call for equal rights for all peoples, regardless of race, creed, or color, as outlined for us in the US Declaration of Independence.
Hmmm . . .
But, like I said, I’m not going to rehearse this matter here. I only wish that all of the hulabaloo over Glenn Beck’s recent rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington had been the catalyst for a much greater interest in Dr. King’s Natural Law-based philosophy.
Perhaps this very brief essay this will do exactly that . . .