Law and Justice - Defense of Tradition - 6.8 Debate: What Justifies Antigone’s Action?

As we think about the nature of justice through the lens of the Greek tragedy Antigone, let's ask one more question. Why is Antigone right in disobeying the decree of Creon, if she is indeed right? Imagine that it's been passed by a democratic body and that there is some legitimate justification, for instance, that we're trying to prevent future terrorists from attacking the city of Thebes. Why then, if you think Antigone is right in disobeying this decree, explain the justification? What justifies it? Is it that she has a right? That she has some kind of immunity that the state cannot intrude upon, whether it's free exercise of religion or some right to behave in a private sphere that can't be regulated by the public, no matter what the outcome, no matter what public good is envisioned? Or is it that Antigone is right? That she has somehow objectively obeying her duty? That what she is doing is truly part of an objective order of right action? It's an important distinction and in some ways our own language of right, which can mean either the right thing or someone's inviolable right to do something, rely upon two different types of justification. And these are important and commentators have asked, what would Sophocles say? And look closely at the text. Does Sophocles think that Antigone is right? Or does he think that she has a right to bury her brother? Is the distinction important? Why or why not?