issue17 <米国有米第七次作业>

blackswitchUID: 2110679

issue 17

The speaker asserts that each person has a duty to not only obey just laws and but also disobey unjust ones.In my view, this statement ignore two important problems ,one is that this question about which laws are just and which ones are unjust is hard to be answer b

The standard of just and unjust law is not unified in individual mind. Perhaps for the same law, some people think it is unjust, but other people think it is unjust. Becaue people judgement about laws’ fairness ususaly is based on that wheater the laws benefit himself/herself. For instance, in China, “forest law” prescribs that trees in forest can not be cut without the government’s permission.This rules is made for protecting our nation’s natural enviroment.But the farmer who  lived near the forest may think this provision is not unjust, because this provision would limit their interstes,without this rules, they can optionlay cut these trees in forest to make furniture or sell to others thereby gaining much money .But other people would oppose this action, because it  would destroy the water and soil and result in the enviromental deterioration.

To keep the social instablity , Law must be implemented equally among the population. Every one must comply with the provison of the laws. As a proverb says” Nothing can be accomplished without norms or standards“.If every one can choose to obey or disoby law accoring to his/her judgement, it would be equal to no law. Without law, nation would be hard to regulate diversified citizens. This case is the same as that a school which lacks rules. If the students in a school only confrom the just laws, the operation of schools would be difficult. This confused condition would happened in school: some students do not go to class, some students copy other students’ paper in exam, some students have a fight with others and so on. Why?because these students thinke these rules of the school are unjust and they can oppose them. Similiary,as a country, if people only obey so called”just” laws, the society would come into confusion. So, the fact that every one must comply with the current laws of nations would contribute to the instablity of society.

However,.Some people would argue that when the ruel is apart from most peple’s benefits, whether we should continue to obey this law. In fact, this case is indeed exist,because any law system is inevitably flawed. However, the correct way of changeing the unjust laws is not simplely diobeying or resisting the unjust laws, but providing suggestion to legislature and requiring to change the unjust provision of the laws.According to these suggestion, the legistration would make appropriate response . For instance , the former laws in China ordain that college students can not be marriage ,but with the accumulation of suggestion against this law, noe ,the legislators changed this rule to permit college student to be marriage.


In sum, laws are inviolable in any society. Every one should not disobey and resist unjust laws by his/her judgment. When we find that some laws destroy a majority of citizen’s intersts, we should apply appropriate ways to change this ,which is feasible in contemporary democratic nations.and this way would sever to the social instablity.

feibingxUID: 2212956

The speaker asserts that each person has a duty to not only obey just laws and but also disobey unjust ones. In my view, this statement ignore two important problems, one is that this question about which laws are just and which ones are unjust is hard to be answer b[......后面呢???…][这句话用形式主语更好一点如 one is that it is hard to be answered which laws are just and which ones are not]

The standard of just and unjust law is not unified in individual mind. Perhaps for the same law, some people think it is unjust, but other people think it is unjust. Because people[‘s] judgement[judgment] about laws’ fairness ususaly[usually] is based on that wheater[whether] the laws benefit himself/herself. For instance, in China, “forest law” prescribs[prescribes] that trees in forest can not be cut without the government’s permission. This rules is made for protecting our nation’s natural enviroment[environment]. But the farmer who lived[live] near the forest may think this provision is not unjust, because this provision would limit their interstes[interests? 是否用benefit/behoof] ,[换分号或者加连词When] without this rules, they can optionlay[optionally] cut these trees in forest to make furniture or sell to others thereby gaining much money. But other people would oppose this action, because it would destroy the water and soil and result in the environmental deterioration.

To keep the social instablity[instability?不是应该stability么？] , Law must be implemented equally among the population. Every one must comply with the provision of the laws. As a proverb says” Nothing can be accomplished without norms or standards“. If every one can choose to obey or disoby law accoring to his /[or] her judgment, it would be equal to no laws. Without laws, the nation would be hard to regulate diversified citizens. This case is the same as that a school which lacks rules. If the students in a school only confrom[conform] the just laws, the operation[management] of schools would be difficult. This confused condition would happene in school: some students do not go to class, some students copy other students’ paper in exam, some students have a fight with others and so on. Why? Because these students think these rules of the school are unjust and they can oppose them. Similiary[Similarly], as a country, if people only obey so called ”just” laws, the society would come into confusion. So, the fact that every one must comply with the current laws of nations would contribute to the instablity[stability] of society.

However, some people would argue that when the ruel[rule] is apart from most people’s benefits, whether we should continue to obey this law. In fact, this case is[两个动词了去掉] indeed[用do就可以] exist, because any law system is inevitably flawed. However, the correct way of changing the unjust laws is not simplely disobeying or resisting the unjust laws, but providing suggestion to legislature and requiring to change the unjust provision of the laws. According to these suggestion, the legistration would make[两个动词了去掉] appropriate response . For instance, the former laws in China ordain that college students can not be marriage, but with the accumulation of suggestion against this law, now, the legislators changed this rule to permit college student to be marriage.

In sum, laws are inviolable in any society. Every one should not disobey and resist unjust laws by his/her judgment. When we find that some laws destroy a majority of citizen’s intersts, we should apply appropriate ways to change this, which is feasible in contemporary democratic nations. And this way would sever to the social instablity.'

总的来说就观点展开的还是十分到位的，行文流畅，逻辑很顺。这个题目我没仔细想过，只是觉得你一边倒的观点是否会有那么一点点危险。还有我不知道你是否是限时做的，下次是否能改好拼写错误再贴上来呢^_^