issue 17 just and unjust 不到十天了 有拍必回

nieyongUID: 2742661

issue 17"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:549
限时写作， 望各位高手不吝给点意见啊， 谢谢！！

1. any individual cannot define what is just laws and what is not objectively. There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people's eyes. 同性恋 安乐死等敏感话题

2.既然是法律， once enacted, 我们就应该遵守，根据自己的好恶来决定遵守还是不是不明智的， 如符合道德的违法不能法外留情

3.当然， 法律是人制定出来的， 就会有错误与偏颇的时候。 而且一套法律不可避免让一部分人受益 触犯另一部分人的利益 我们不能泄私愤，而应用适当的方式由立法机关修改完善法律， 使其尽量服务与社会~ 如收税调整贫富差距和工作积极性。


How do we perceive the just and unjust aspects of laws? The speaker contends that just laws should be respected by whatever persons while unjust laws should be disobeyed and even resisted. In my opinion, I agree with the speaker insofar that every member of the society have the duty to obey just laws. However, how do we define such subjective concept: "just"? And even if unjust laws exist, drastic measures shouldn't be taken by us.


First and foremost, as there are no objective criteria, any individual cannot define what is just law,. As an old saying goes: "There are a thousand Helmets in a thousand people's eyes", similarly, every individual has its own perception of what is just and what is unjust according to their culture in the past and current position. For instance, homosexuality, which is relatively widespread in our contemporary society, has received numerous criticism as well as support from all kinds of classes. The opponents regard it as the dregs of the society and violate the core value of the public while supporters suppose it to be the progress of humanity in freedom and democracy. Even certain countries passed laws to make the gays legal while other countries criticize it harshly. Another example involves euthanasia, which enable the patients in their late ages die naturally to diminish their sufferings. But does it violate the human right of living? As well, laws of different countries vary greatly. Therefore, The concept of "just" is a rather subjective idea, and we cannot give a concrete definition of it.


Secondly, now that it's a law, once enacted, we should obey without question. Making decisions between whether to obey in accordance to our own interests is not advisable. Common sense tells us that the range of ethics and laws are not the same. When something is accepted by the majorities mentally but violate the law, laws should be obeyed on all accounts. When coming across affairs related to family members, even on the court, the love between family members still lies in each other. However, if we disobey the law, the principles and the orders of the society will be disarrayed. After all, laws are the foundation of a harmonious society.


Admittedly, since law is made by humans, chances do exist when there are fallacies and partialness. Law can never satisfy everyone simultaneously. Laws will benefit the majorities but cannot avoid violating the interests of others. One apt illustration involves the taxes. Nowadays, the percentages of the taxes of people in different classes are gaining increasing attention which diminish the income of the high class but in some extent influence the motivation the people who are wealthy to create more. Up till now, laws on taxes have been mended lots of times and will be perfected by the government continuously to be fit in with most of the taxpayers. Meanwhile, No matter how much you are complaint about the law, you can only take proper measures to adapt it rather than violate, or you will be sent into prisons as a consequence.


In conclusion, the definition between just and unjust laws is ambiguous. However, once enacted, the law should be obeyed. Finally, fallacies of the law should only be perfected by government, and it's not wise to disobey and resist it.

nieyongUID: 2742661

自己先顶一下~~

nieyongUID: 2742661

自己最后顶一下了~

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

issue 17 just and unjust 不到十天了 有拍必回

issue 17"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:549 限时写作， 望各位高手不吝给点意见啊， 谢谢！！ 1. any individual cannot define what is just laws and what is not objectively. There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people's eyes. 同性恋 安乐死等敏感话题 2.既然是法律， once enacted, 我们就应该遵守，根据自己的好恶来决定遵守还是不是不明智的， 如符合道德的违法不能法外留情 3.当然， 法律是人制定出来的， 就会有错误与偏颇的时候。 而且一套法律不可避免让一部分人受益 触犯另一部分人的利益 我们不能泄私愤，而应用适当的方式由立法机关修改完善法律， 使其尽量服务与社会~ 如收税调整贫富差距和工作积极性。 How do we perceive the just and unjust aspects of laws? The speaker contends that just laws should be respected by whatever persons while unjust laws should be disobeyed and even resisted. In my opinion, I agree with the speaker insofar that every member of the society have the duty to obey just laws. However, how do we define such subjective concept: "just"? And even if unjust laws exist, drastic measures shouldn't be taken by us. First and foremost, as there are no objective criteria, any individual cannot define what is just law,. As an old saying goes: "There are a thousand Helmets in a thousand people's eyes", similarly, every individual has its own perception of what is just and what is unjust according to their culture in the past and current position.(大部分应该还是just的吧，相对来说少数部分才是具有争议性的，这点应该说明，否则与后面觉得例子有衔接不了的感觉。又一个特例来结束大多情况。想起66给我举的一例…←) For instance, homosexuality, which is relatively widespread in our contemporary society, has received numerous criticism as well as support from all kinds of classes. The opponents regard it as the dregs of the society and violate the core value of the public while supporters suppose it to be the progress of humanity in freedom and democracy. Even certain countries passed laws to make the gays legal while other countries criticize it harshly. Another example involves euthanasia, which enable the patients in their late ages die naturally to diminish their sufferings. But does it violate the human right of living? As well, laws of different countries vary greatly. Therefore, The concept of "just" is a rather subjective idea, and we cannot give a concrete definition of it. (同性恋更多的是道德上的问题吧，同性恋的婚姻合法化是一例。) Secondly, now that it's a law, once enacted, we should obey without question. Making decisions between whether to obey in accordance to (词组记混了？…) our own interests is not advisable. Common sense tells us that the range of ethics and laws are not the same. When something is accepted by the majorities mentally but violate the law, laws should be obeyed on all accounts. When coming across affairs related to family members, even on the court, the love between family members still lies in each other. However, if we disobey the law, the principles and the orders of the society will be disarrayed. After all, laws are the foundation of a harmonious society. Admittedly, since law is made by humans, chances do exist when there are fallacies and partialness. Law can never satisfy everyone simultaneously. Laws will benefit the majorities but cannot avoid violating the interests of others. One apt illustration involves the taxes. Nowadays, the percentages of the taxes of people in different classes are gaining increasing attention which diminish the income of the high class but in some extent influence the motivation the people who are wealthy to create more. Up till now, laws on taxes have been mended lots of times and will be perfected by the government continuously to be fit in with most of the taxpayers. Meanwhile, No matter how much you are complaint about the law, you can only take proper measures to adapt it rather than violate, or you will be sent into prisons as a consequence. In conclusion, the definition between just and unjust laws is ambiguous. However, once enacted, the law should be obeyed. Finally, fallacies of the law should only be perfected by government, and it's not wise to disobey and resist it. (conclusion不漂亮哦，尤其一个finally，像在说中文了，逻辑乱了。) [/td][/tr]

根据我对statement的理解，even more importantly, 应该引起重视，也就是说应该有个侧重点在这里。你对unjust law 的态度是认为应该由政府来改善调整，忽略对individual角色的考虑。Law一般不会和政府的利益冲突，当受益一方为察觉其不公平性有何作用的时候是很难主动修订的。这时候个人的作用就比较重要了。——个人意见，仅供发散思维参考。