Issue174 拍狠了我可拍你哦！！！

vico8478UID: 2120997

There is much debate over the issues that laws should be rigid or flexible. On one hand, some people believe that laws should be rigid or fixed; on the other hand, others maintain that laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. In my point of view, whether one has advantages over the other depends on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, I would like to present my reasons to support my point of view.

First of all, laws should be flexible depending on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, I would like to demonstrate this point from two aspects. From the social aspects, as we can see, laws should develop with the society, since the fundamental goal of the law is to serve for the society, reassure a good order in society. Without law, the society would totally be a mass. We can take the United States for example. In 1787, the first Constitution was born, instead of being fixed, ten amendments were added to the Constitution to ensure human rights in 1791. Until now, there has been twenty-seven amendments, much more words than the initial Constitution. Another evidence can illustrate the point: During the Civil War, Lincoln enacted the laws that entitled the equal rights to the blacks with the whites in order to win more allied forces. While from the business aspects, the economic law has been developed while the economics increased. For example, antitrust and anti-dumping laws which appeared a few years ago have play an active role in the cases of international trades.

Second, however, laws should also have a relative stability. Within a country, a period of time, laws should stay relatively stable, which doesn’t means fixed or stationary, but keep a consistency in spirit of laws. Without such coherence, people will be confused and distrust laws and legal system.

Finally, as the discussion above, we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law. Because without rigidity and coherence, laws would be so elusive that no one will respect and obey the laws, so the laws would definitely fail to achieve its original aim. However, without flexibility, we could not make a perfect law, then we could not make a harmonious society.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive that any one of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law so that we can make a harmonious society.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-6 at 10:34 ]

polymathUID: 179557

哦！时间掌握的很不错呢！羡慕中！偶打字慢死了！:L

顶一下！大家都来学习修改啊！集体的力量是无穷:)

plutoplutoUID: 2116389

那我这个新手来学习一下吧\
一定很轻很轻的拍

plutoplutoUID: 2116389

There is much debate over the issues that laws should be rigid or flexible. On one hand, some people believe that laws should be rigid or fixed; on the other hand, others maintain that laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. In my point of view, whether one has advantages over the other depends on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, I would like to present my reasons to support my point of view.
我感觉第一段有些罗嗦, 个人认为这样好些There is much debate over the issues that laws should be rigid or flexible.Some people believe that laws should be rigid or fixed while others maintain that laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. In my point of view, whether one has advantages over the other depends on specific conditions.

First of all, laws should be flexible depending on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, 为了与前文一致, 不如将方括号之前删去,改为First,I would like to demonstrate this point from two aspects. From the social aspects, as we can see, laws should develop with the society, since the fundamental goal of the law is to serve for the society, reassure a good order in society. Without law, the society would totally be a mass. 感觉有最好能注意词语的替换, 我也没想出来用什么别的词好, 但不能翻来覆去的只是SOCIETY和LAWWe can WE CAN可以去掉take the United States for example. In 1787, the first Constitution was born, instead of being fixed, ten amendments were added to the Constitution to ensure human rights in 1791. Until now, there has been twenty-seven amendments, much more words than the initial Constitution. Another evidence can illustrate the point: During the Civil War, Lincoln enacted the laws that entitled the equal rights to the blacks with the whites in order to win more allied forces.（1），Constitution的例子很好, 如果偶碰到这个题, 不介意偶套用吧??（2），林肯的例子说完后建议总结下,说在不同社会时期, 为了更好的服务社会, 法律既可以是稳定也可以有灵活性之类,（3）但如果你是想说在社会方面法律应是稳定的， 就不要举林肯的例子 While from the business aspects, the economic law has been developed while the economics increased. For example, antitrust and anti-dumping laws which appeared a few years ago have play an active role in the cases of international trades.最好有句总结

Second, however, laws should also have a relative stability. Within a country, a period of time, laws should stay relatively stable, which doesn’t means fixed or stationary, but keep a consistency in spirit of laws. Without such coherence, people will be confused and distrust laws and legal system.这一段有些薄弱，最好举了RELATIVE STABLE的例子

Finally, as the discussion above, we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law. Because without rigidity and coherence, laws would be so elusive that no one will respect and obey the laws, so the laws would definitely fail to achieve its original aim. However, without flexibility, we could not make a perfect law, then we could not make a harmonious society.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive that any one of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law so that we can make a harmonious society.后两段总结的不错啊， 但感觉全文还是有些薄弱， 尤其第二段之后， 可以将第三段再写厚实些， 也可以将第二段分为两段，然后充实一下段首段尾

飞啊~飞UID: 2121330

There is much debate over the issues that laws should be rigid or flexible. On one hand, some people believe that laws should be rigid or fixed[这里最好还加一句，讲清楚为什么fixed]; on the other hand, others maintain that laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. In my point of view, whether one has advantages over the other depends on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, I would like to present my reasons to support my point of view.

First of all, laws should be flexible depending on the specific conditions. In the following discussion, I would like to demonstrate this point from two aspects. From the social aspects, as we can see, laws should develop with the society, since the fundamental goal of the law is to serve for the society, reassure[reassuring] a good order in society.[说明了：所以，当社会发生变化时，法律也应该跟着变] Without law[有问题，题目不是讨论需要不需要法律], the society would totally be a mass.[这句去掉好了] We can take the United States for example. In 1787, the first Constitution was born, instead of being fixed, ten amendments were added to the Constitution to ensure human rights in 1791. Until now, there has been twenty-seven amendments, much more words than the initial Constitution. [你有个问题：没有对例子地分析！要把例子根题目联系起来。比如这里就应该说明了随着社会的发展，美国法律不断有新的东西加进去。判卷的人那多都是白人，你不说明白他们是不会大脑转弯取想的]Another evidence can illustrate the point: During the Civil War,[ 这里也是，因为黑人解放了，所以新法律出台，权力下放。。。] Lincoln enacted the laws that entitled the equal rights to the blacks with the whites in order to win more allied forces. While from the business aspects, the economic law has been developed while the economics increased. For example, antitrust and anti-dumping laws which appeared a few years ago have play an active role in the cases of international trades.

Second, however, laws should also have a relative stability. Within a country, a period of time, laws should stay relatively stable, which doesn’t[do not] means fixed or stationary,[这个插入语~~~废话。请原谅我用了这个不甚文明的词] but keep a consistency in spirit of laws[什么意思?查不到。]. Without such coherence, people will be confused and distrust laws and legal system.这就没了？！晕~~你可以写点具体的为什么阿。引起社会不稳定阿，今天变明天改的，没有一个确定的标准，没办法执行。。。例子呢？我们各国法律虽然会有修改，但是都是一点点改的，整体上是连贯的。。。没例子可以假设论证阿?

Finally, as the discussion above, we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law. Because without rigidity and coherence, laws would be so elusive that no one will respect and obey the laws, so the laws would definitely fail to achieve its original aim. However, without flexibility, we could not make a perfect[噢，抽象！] law, then we could not make a harmonious society. 没有挖开说！还是停留在前两段的位置。可以结合起来说，修改是为了让法律适应发展更长久的延续下去~~我也没想得太清楚 T

o sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, which sometimes intertwine to form an organic whole and thus become more persuasive that any one of them, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that we should strike a balance between the rigidity and flexibility of law so that we can make a harmonious society.

限时的原因吧，b2.3都太简单了，没时间不如就写两段说清楚了，再把你的b3改成结尾
个人之见
我的连接, 期待你的意见:)https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=312503&fpage=1&highlight=

飞啊~飞UID: 2121330

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1