ISSUE17 求拍 留链互拍

钢琴宝宝UID: 2303982

Each one in the world cannot live without the law, upon which the society based. Are there two types of laws as the speaker claims? In my own perspective, it is unilateral to classify laws as either just or unjust, since the law cannot be easily defined by individuals. Though some unjustifiable laws demand to be modified by legislature, it is individuals' obligation to obey items in the law for ensuring a stable and peaceful society.

Whether the law is just cannot be simply confirm, considering it hinges on peoples' own outlook on life and world. Some may tend to agree with some certain behavior, while others regard the negative effect resulted from the action is outweigh the merit. For supporting examples, one should look no further than the issues regarding homosexuality. Those who accept the traditionally moral concept may deem it as inappropriate for both individuals and society. Yet, residents who hold the opposite perspective may regard it as freedom of human beings, and therefore is stand in the side of those gays or lesbians. Vast majority of countries currently banned the marriage of people who are homosexual, whereas merely few countries admit the event. For those who live in the country which forbid homosexuality but take it for granted, or for those living in the freedom countries which allow the marriage of the gays and lesbians, it seems that the law is quite unfair in their own perceptions. Accordingly, individuals cannot judge the law absolutely correct due to maintaining different viewpoints toward the society,

On the other hand, conception toward the law also rest on various interests. Consider, for instance, the policy of protective tariffs. In order to , for their own interests, protect and preserve those national industry, the government may enact quite a few items in the law to inhibit the imported goods, which may increased the price of those products abroad. It is not beneficial for residents in the country for prohibitively expensive price to buy those products, and even seems unfair for those foreign companies. Notwithstanding, the national industry may be preserved in the competition, and flourish in the future, in that way to provide financial aids for the society. On the personal level that the law of the tariff probably not justifiable, however, it indeed contribute to the prospect of the national industry and benefit the whole country. Hence, individuals vary from their opinion for laws because of the different interests.

It is unquestionably that people should obey the law and mutually maintain a tranquil society. Disobedience will exert detrimental result to the society. A case in point in that the illegal sale of blood. Some people who suffer from poverty and necessitate money hastily may seek for opportunities for obtaining money, and selling the blood seems the only and swift means, in spite of the poor sanitary condition. Yet, being at the risk of the contagious diseases, the illicit transaction of blood potentially jeopardizes individuals. Even if they regard it as a legitimate action, it is undeniably cast profoundly harmful influence in the society, in likes of the transmitting of the epidemic. The law system guarantees the social stability and relatively fair circumstance for most individuals.

However, the government is urged to modify and complete some laws coincident with the development of the society. Some laws may be unreasonable and lack of profound contemplation, thus need be reconsidered by the legislature. The institution, if necessary, can broadly assimilate the perspective of the citizens, and revise some items in the law. Some new items are supposed to added in the law as the growing number of new things emerged, such as the internet, accompany with the high criminal occurrences rate. Only through the channel can the law system be more effective and complete.

In conclusion, it is not sagacious to simply define the law as just or unjust for its own characteristic. Meanwhile, each citizen should follow items in the law to build a stable and harmony society, and the legislature is supposed to punctually modify and complete laws for adjusting to the advancement of the society.  

justinweiUID: 2234137

lz这篇文章逻辑上存在比较严重的问题，剑走偏锋值得鼓励，但并不能自圆其说。
首先，存在公正与非公正的法律是issue的前提，也就是说，题目考察的并不是对存在性的怀疑，而是对既定事实的价值判断
其次，lz认为由于各自主观因素的不同，并不存在客观的公正标准，这也是不成立的。公正的标准基本上自然要符合大多数人的利益，而有损于少数人的利益。
再次，lz卖血的例子是为了说明某些人认为合理的决策实际上危害社会，这恰恰说明了法律存在的必要性，避免少部分人的行为盲目。
总之，楼主的文章主题部分均没有很好的紧扣首段提出的与题目相关的中心，因此有跑题的嫌疑。