=七月流火=小组第四次作业 Issue 17 by ianking7368

ianking7368UID: 2655993

TOPIC: ISSUE17 - "There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."
WORDS: 344 (609)
TIME: 00:43:00
DATE: 2009-8-25 上午 10:39:22

It has always a major issue for our society that whether law, rules that symbolizes the justice and equality for community members, is just indeed.
I think the answer is not simply "yes" or "no” for a universal standard of justice actually doesn't exit. Then should we disobey and resist "unjust laws" as the state claims?
It is true that the absolute justice is difficult or even impossible to reach, however, it doesn't mean individuals or groups could go against the law in the name of "unjustness". In fact, law is a compulsive and authoritative mean to regulate the behavior of all community members and its value lies in that once it is legislated, no one could break it easily.

Undoubted, although the original purpose and function of law is to hold social justice, it cannot achieve the goal of "absolute justice" for justice itself is such an abstractive and controversial concept. Justice, one of the basic moral standard and emphasizing fairness and equality between people, actually consists of relativity within itself. Judging from different angles or perspectives, different people may get different, even adverse conclusions. In addition, laws actually reflect the relationship between social members. Therefore, in autocratic society or certain period of history, law lost its justice. For instance, during the period of Nazi Germany, Jews were unfairly deprived of their basic human rights. So in this sense, the “unjust law” really exists. However we shouldn’t omit the fact that laws, especially in democratic society, are all aiming at maintain justice and fairness for all the people and in every circumstances, although sometimes the practical effects are not always that satisfying.

However, despite that the law may suffer from flaws and can’t be absolutely just, it is not the excuse for some individuals to break or resist it. That’s because besides morality, law is the only powerful rule and common standard for all community members that regulate people's behavior compulsively. If everyone could easily disobey it, then the authority and dignity of law, as well as the public will would be trampled and law would become no more than invalid words. Someone may argue that disobeying the “unjust law” is to protect the “justice”, however, this excuses often turn out to be protecting their own interests and harming freedom and rights of others. Behavior like that may even lead to social unrest and disorder. Just as the philosopher Aristotle said, “The rule of law is better than the rule of any individual”.

A question may arise that then how could we uphold justice with “unjust laws”.
In fact, the law itself is less a body of stable or permanent regulations than a dynamic and constantly changing system according to different circumstances and situations. So the best solution to “unjust law” is to prevent it in the process of legislation. In democratic society, there are many useful and peaceful means for the general public to make necessary adjustments of laws. For example, through mass media and internet, the public could express their thoughts about the effect of certain laws and hence influence the legislature. Besides, during the process of legislating, certain flexibilities should be taken into account to cope with various circumstances, times and places. But the legislating and adjusting of law should be cautious and fully considered and once the law is written, breaking it would be illegal.
In summary, there is no absolutely just law in reality and law itself could be changed or adapted for various circumstances. But it is a basic demand in modern society that everyone should obey the law, which is the base and assurance for our social fairness, harmony and prosperity.