Issue17 请指教!

天地无用UID: 112318

报了八月初,哎,伸头也是一刀,缩头也是一刀, 勇敢点也没什么了不起的,今天写Issue 17, 政治类,请指教!

Issue 17, SUN Yuan 64
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.

Syllabus:
Position: we should obey the just laws. But as to the unjust laws, resisting is not advisable.
1: As an individual, nobody can certify that whether a law is just or unjust.
2: Undoubtedly, every citizen should obey just laws, which preconditions a stable and orderly society.
3: in a democracy society, individual should be allowed to give advice and supervise the laws through legal way.

I fundamentally agree with the author’s first sentence that there are two types of laws, just and unjust. But as to the second contention, does every individual in a society have a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws? While the author might overlook the mode and method of objection, on balance I agree that we should give advice to government in a mild way, but not drive ourselves into opposition of the laws by resenting and resisting it. To get a full understanding of what this means we must turn first to some resent human evidence.

At first, the author claims that we should disobey the unjust laws, but how to certify that whether a law is just or unjust? It seems that the answer is majority of people. To be more prices, maybe a law is unfitted to a few of individuals, but those individuals should compromise his or her assertion or interests when it comes to the benefit of a group or overall society. In other words, the resisting of laws, as an individual action should not be encouraged. The disadvantages of such a behavior are clear enough: while the number of crimes and criminals is mounting to astronomical figures and shows no signs at present of ceasing to rise, the society becomes more unstable, and almost all criminals will suffer from a bitter prisoner time or serious economic punishment. For the reasons given above, we strongly hold that a healthier attitude to laws servers better both for us and society.

In addition, undoubtedly, every citizen should obey just laws, which preconditions a stable and orderly society. By this I mean human civilization has reached a stage at which we can maintain a stable and orderly society by our legal system, and anyone who disobeys the law would be punished or jailed. With regard to the importance of laws, what people should do besides submitting to it, is to respect it. That is to say, our harmonious society environment is based on those clauses. And we should realize that how long it was before we deemed it necessary to establish a just legal system, and how much this system means to a stable and orderly society.

At the last but not the least, a democracy government and an integrated legal system should have its own self-improvement department. Nor should specific law be insisted when that is proved absurd or call human’ rights under damage. Furthermore, mistakes and uncertain points, however micro and indistinct they may be, are to same degree inevitable. So there should be a benign channel through which we can revise laws legally, and the system will never be stable and benign, if the only way to edit the limitation in clauses is by people’s resisting.

In conclusion, a harmonious society environment is based on an excellent legal system. Admittedly, there is no law without any bugs has been establish in human’s history, but the individuals’ behaviors of challenging unjust laws is unwise. Although the author’s assert is not entirely without support, it runs contrary to common sense and everyday human experience. On the balance I agree that in a democracy society, individual should be allowed to give advice and supervise laws through legal channel, moreover, a perfect legal system calls for a long time and intimate cooperation of all dimensions of society. Yet only through this way can we convey human experience in all its dimensions, and thereby fully understand and appreciate our life in a positive legal society.

treesUID: 82785

我拿下去研究，瞥了一眼，整体感觉挺清楚的。明天贴给你

feier521UID: 109747

先头兵啊！佩服佩服！
祝无用老兄杀G成功！不要用脖子挨刀，呵呵！
I fundamentally agree with the author’s first sentence that there are two types of laws, just and unjust. But as to the second contention, does every individual in a society have a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws? While the author might overlook the mode and method of objection, on balance I agree that we should give advice to government in a mild way, but not drive ourselves into opposition of the laws by resenting and resisting it(them). To get a full understanding of what this means we must turn first to some resent（? recent） human evidence.

At first, the author claims that we should disobey the unjust laws, but how to certify （that） whether a law is just or unjust? It seems that the answer is (depends on the) majority of people. To be more prices (precise), maybe（不如改成sometimes） a law is unfitted to a few of individuals, but（and） those individuals should compromise his or her (their) assertion(s) or interests when it comes to the benefit of a group or overall society. In other words, the resisting of laws, as an individual(‘s) action should not be encouraged. The disadvantages of such a behavior are clear enough: while the number of crimes and criminals is mounting to astronomical figures and shows no signs at present of ceasing to rise, the society becomes more unstable, and almost all criminals will suffer from a bitter prisoner time or serious economic punishment. For the reasons given above, we strongly hold that a healthier attitude to laws servers (serves) better both for us and society.

In addition, undoubtedly, every citizen should obey just laws, which preconditions a stable and orderly society. By this I mean human civilization has reached a stage at which we can maintain a stable and orderly society by our legal system, and anyone who disobeys the law would be punished or jailed. With regard to the importance of laws, what people should do besides submitting to it, is to respect it. That is to say, our harmonious society environment is based on those clauses. And we should realize that how long it was before we deemed it necessary to establish a just legal system, and how much this system means to a stable and orderly society. （最后一句好像和topic没有多大关系。好像感觉老是stable and orderly society，是不是该说得具体一点啊，比如，保障人们正常的学习，生活和工作，经济，政治体系的正常运转…）

At the last but not the least, a democracy government and an integrated legal system should have its(their) own self-improvement department.（后面好像没有说这种自我完善的部门是怎么工作的。）
Nor should specific law be insisted when that is proved absurd or call human’ rights under damage. Furthermore, mistakes and uncertain points, however micro and indistinct they may be, are to same degree inevitable. So there should be a benign channel 是不是应该具体说一下人们的legal channel，）through which we can revise laws legally, and the system will never be stable and benign, if the only way to edit the limitation in clauses is by people’s resisting.

In conclusion, a harmonious society environment is based on an excellent legal system. Admittedly, there is no law without any bugs has been establish(ed) in human’s history, but the individuals’ behaviors of challenging unjust laws is unwise. Although the author’s assert(ion) is not entirely without support, it runs contrary to common sense and everyday human experience. On (the) balance I agree that in a democracy society, individual should be allowed to give advice and supervise laws through legal channel, moreover, a perfect legal system calls for a long time and intimate cooperation of all dimensions of society. （我觉得结论加了好多论述中没有的观点，好像不大好吧）Yet only through this way can we convey human experience in all its dimensions, and thereby fully understand and appreciate our life in a positive legal society.

也不知道改的对不对？个人意见。排砖！^_^

treesUID: 82785

我觉得你进步好大的呢！加油！不表扬了，光说问题吧：
第1段还是觉得有点长，主要是句势绕的我晕晕的
第2段第二句It seems that the answer is majority of people. 这个在这里什么意思呢？不懂
发现你写作的一个小秘密，你比较喜欢用从句里套how,what,wether等等，很好的句型呢。
还有就是结尾好长哦