Issue17 [Shinging Up]

veinardUID: 2195006

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."

Laws, enacted by the government in order to administer and control the behaviors of its citizens, are crucial to a society. The statement which calls on people to obey the just laws while disobey the unjust ones neglects that the criteria of just and unjust laws is almost impossible to establish, disobeying and even resisting the so-called unjust laws may demolish the harmony of society, with chaos emerging.

Admittedly, there were some acknowledged unjust laws in history, especially in the society in which the democracy and civilization had not been fully formed. For instance, before the Civil War, treating the black people as slaves and depriving their freedom and various rights was the one of the federal laws, which not only unfairly treat to the black people, but also hampered the economy and society progress of America, which even threaten the unification and stability of the country. It hard to imagine without the unremitting effort of the blacks and their supports to resist the unjust laws, America could advance to free and democracy society.

However, under most circumstance, defining the specific concepts of both just and unjust laws is unpractical. The modern society, in which the level of democracy and civilization has been highly promoted, rarely has the laws cited above that damage the interests of most people and even hamper the progress of the society. Whether the laws are just or not is involved with a subjective concern that varies in terms of individual interests, social classes and one's personal system if value. Consider, for example, for the homosexual people and their supporters, the laws permitted their right of marriage are just, as they think homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals. While for other people, the laws are unjust because homosexual actions not cause some serious diseases such as AIDS, but also violate the morality and ethics of human. The instance reveals that justice is in the eyes of the backers of certain laws--the judgment on whether a specific law is just or not differs among people.

Although no one can establish an exact criterion to judge the just and unjust laws, it does not mean that we should ignore the flaws of laws. People's intention to improve the justice system is understandable and necessary, however, direct disobedience and resistance is not recommended. Alternative approaches, which are not so radical, can be adopted to attain the goal of amelioration of laws. Though legislation reform—one of the apropos methods to decrease the flews in laws, people can access to the better execution of justice, but not drastically resist the laws. Such methods can not only assure the laws to be just to a great extent, but also avoid the instability and disorder brought about by the resistance. Nevertheless, once passed though and put into effect, laws should be obeyed by all people to insure the security of the society and the interests of the majority.

In sum, categorizing laws as just and unjust is infeasible and meaningless in most situations. It is unreasonable to claim that people have the responsibility to obey the just laws and disobey or even resist the unjust laws. The best way to solute the controversy over the laws is to make sure that the majority's interests are protected by them and meanwhile, optimize the approaches to the amelioration of laws.
557

fingerliUID: 2130195

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."

Laws, enacted by the government in order to administer and control the behaviors of its citizens, are crucial to a society. The statement which calls on people to obey the just laws while disobey the unjust ones neglects that the criteria of just and unjust laws is almost impossible to establish, disobeying and even resisting the so-called unjust laws may demolish the harmony of society, with chaos emerging.

Admittedly, there were some acknowledged unjust laws in history, especially in the society in which the democracy and civilization had not been fully formed. For instance, before the Civil War, treating the black people as slaves and depriving their freedom and various rights was the one of the federal laws, which not only unfairly treat to the black people, but also hampered the economy and society progress of America, which even threaten the unification and stability of the country. It hard to imagine without the unremitting effort of the blacks 老美心里是不是很不爽呢，他们引以为豪得咚咚你没提，不过逻辑上＆其他方面都没问题，让他不爽把 and their supports to resist the unjust laws, America could advance to free and democracy society.

However, under most circumstance, defining the specific concepts of both just and unjust laws is unpractical. The modern society, in which the level of democracy and civilization has been highly promoted, rarely has the laws cited above that damage the interests of most people and even hamper the progress of the society. Whether the laws are just or not is involved with a subjective concern that varies in terms of individual interests, social classes and one's personal system if value. Consider, for example, for the homosexual people and their supporters, the laws permitted their right of marriage are just, as they think homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals. While for other people, the laws are unjust because homosexual actions not cause some serious diseases such as AIDS, but also violate the morality and ethics of human. The instance reveals that justice is in the eyes of the backers of certain laws--the judgment on whether a specific law is just or not differs among people.

Although no one can establish an exact criterion to judge the just and unjust laws, it does not mean that we should ignore the flaws of laws. People's intention to improve the justice system is understandable and necessary, however, direct disobedience and resistance is not recommended. Alternative approaches, which are not so radical, can be adopted to attain the goal of amelioration of laws. Though legislation reform—one of the apropos methods to decrease the flews in laws, people can access to the better execution of justice, but not drastically resist the laws. Such methods can not only assure the laws to be just to a great extent, but also avoid the instability and disorder brought about by the resistance. Nevertheless, once passed though and put into effect, laws should be obeyed by all people to insure the security of the society and the interests of the majority.

In sum, categorizing laws as just and unjust is infeasible and meaningless in most situations. It is unreasonable to claim that people have the responsibility to obey the just laws and disobey or even resist the unjust laws. The best way to solute the controversy over the laws is to make sure that the majority's interests are protected by them and meanwhile, optimize the approaches to the amelioration of laws.
舍不得改啊舍不得改，深切认同
思路和我的几乎一样，语言流畅，没得说，没的说
有时间也改下我得把  http://edu.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=518510&extra=page%3D1