issue17 十二月高强组第二周周三作业

waidswUID: 2256074

题目：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."
字数：642          用时：0:45:00          日期：2006-11-29
我们不用该不遵从或是反对不公平的法律
1 法律的确有不公平的地方
如果鼓励人们去反对不公平的法律会有危害
2 没有确定的手段说明法律公不公正。
3 反对不公平的法律会导致社会混乱
4 有别的解决法律不公正的方法， 而不是极端的抵制。
Do we have the responsibility to obey just laws and meanwhile, disobey and resist unjust laws as the speaker claims? I concede that the laws are not always just and fair, however, disobey of unjust laws are always lead to confusion and disorder, or even disaster. I will illustrate my views specifically below.

To begin with, the laws are inherently not impartial. For the original purpose of the laws are the means that the group in power regulate and somehow exploit the inferior groups. And with the evolvement of the mankind and human society, the laws develop as well, and therefore became more acceptable for the multitude in that mostly the laws defend the rights and protect the security of civilians. Whereas, the unjust laws always exits. Moreover, the designers of the laws are a tiny segment of the whole population, which render the laws always reflect the will of those people, and therefore cause the unjust of laws. Take a past term issue for example, before the endeavor of Martin Luther King and the civil right movement, black people in American were unfairly treated, which was approved and supported by the laws.

However, it is dangerous to encourage people to disobey unjust laws. In the first place, there is no certain way to define whether the law is just or unjust. People’s thoughts are usually rooted on their own experiences and knowledge. Hence different person have diverse opinions about the same entry of law. In addition, the society is divided in to different groups, and each group has its own standpoint to assess the laws based on its values and benefits. In this case, as a reason of the diversity of people's ideas, there is no such laws which is totally fair to any people. For example, perhaps in the head of the terrorists, they harmful activities are part of their so called” holy wars" which is the will of their god and the punishments for that actions defined by laws are unfair.

In the second place, the action of resistance to the law could lead to disorder of the society. The laws are effective and divine only in that they are cherished and respected entirely. Which means any activities that exceed the boundary of laws should be punished. It is mostly the power of the laws that make the society executing smoothly and harmoniously.  When the laws lost its holy status or otherwise people could neglect the power of the law and never fear for the punishment, there is no regulation around our society and in turn will determine the well-being of anyone in the society.

In the third place, there are other ways to maintain our rational rights rather than disobey the law. Instead of the extreme way to disobey the laws, there are some other mild and effective ways to make changes. It is always said that when the lord closes a door, he opens a window. The most effective way is to ask for help. The advanced technologies currently make it is possible for us to arise the public attention, through the world-wide internet, or other form of medias such as newspaper, television or broadcast. Then we could try to alter the laws which apparently unjust, or unjust by the eyes of the mass. We could also search for assists in the juristically fields. Such as hire a lawyer to revaluate the condition and make progress. All these activities must be under the permission of the laws. It is impossible to make use of illegal means to solve problems relevant to laws.

To sum up, the suggestion that we could disobey and resist unjust laws is specious and harmful. Concerning the potential harm it may inflict on individuals as well as the society, we should adopt other means in the region of legislation to maintain our rights.