Again we must agree to differ - although I'm afraid from my perspective this is turning into nothing much more than a pissing contest.
A lot of 'laws' were broken in the civil rights movement in America in the 60's. If you want to call those acts of civil disobediance crimes too, well technically you might be right, but thank god for those 'criminals' and the risks they were prepared to take.
Similarly you mention the British Poll Tax. Well crime or not, a mass movement of civil disobediance - and a virtual public up rising - overturned what was undoubtedly an unjust tax. Did people break the law by refusing to pay the tax and by going to jail for it? Certainly. Was the end result worthwhile, despite whatever the law of the day might have been? Yes, unarguably is was. Indeed throughout the world people are 'breaking the law' in order to struggle for their basic human rights and freedoms. It is somewhat of a cliche to point out to you that not all laws currently on the statute books are inherantly just. Sometimes in a stuggle for genuine justice, breaking the law may be the only option.
If I were you I would read your history books. History is litterd with people who 'broke the law' - and as a result eventually chaged the world for the better for everyone.
It is not always wise in this respect to side solely with the legislators. They do not always win.
Q
