Issue17（互拍互拍呵）

wenwenwen4444UID: 2377774

"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."


In one of the most dramatic climaxes to Formula One season in 2007, Felipe
Massa, who was one of drivers of Ferrari and graped his first position at the
beginning, obeyed the team order that enabled his teamate Kimi Rikkonen who
had the possibility of being newly-crowned world champion if he won in this
Brazilian Grand Prix to take the lead. Finally, Kimi Rikkonen whose first
place gave him ten points snatched his first world champion fortunately. It
is obviously that the order is unjust to Felipe Massa but beneficial to the
whole team. The lesson we can draw from the fact is clear that: categorized
law as either just law that should be obeyed or unjust law that would be
disobeyed and even resisted is too extreme.

First of all, whether a law is just or unjust cannot be ambigutily judged by
one unchangeable objective theory. Just like a double-edged sword, law can be
fair to one part of people but unfair to the other part. Take the new law of
marriage in China for example, normally one couple can have only one child,
however, it is allowed to have two children by the new law if both members in
this couple are singletons. Obviously, this rule is unfair to the couple who
failing conform to the requirement and are eager to have one more child.
Therefore, is it this new law just or unjust? In my view, law is a rule of
conduct that is established by custom and authority but not individual's
subjective judgement of just or unjust.        

Sencondly, the law which has been taken into practice like the rule should be
obeyed even though it is unfair to some people, otherwise the normal order
would be disturbed. There has been decades of yeas in law of marriage in
China that inhibiting intermarriage which is prevailing in hundreds of years
ago. It is assumed that people who disagree this rule and persist his old
ways, a grievous consequence will be come: more and more innate disabled
infants coming into the world for the following years would become the burden
of many families and goverment. What's more, the detrimental effects of
intermarriage will lead to the agitation and panic of public that destroy the
balance of society.         

However, with the development of contemporary society some laws will be found
unadaptable in certain situations. A survey issued by the National Bureau of
Statistic of China suggests that the average income in 2006 is approximately
the double of that in 2000. Therefore, If the law fail to be revised to
increase the standard of personal income tax accordingly by goverment, it
would hamper the progress of economy and the normal life of citizens.  

In the final analysis, law that representes and maintains the benefits and
rights of most people is not established by individual but government.  
Obeying law is us citizens' obligation no matter it seems to be just or
unjust in pesonal interest.            

[ 本帖最后由 wenwenwen4444 于 2008-2-12 12:50 编辑 ]

yientsui624UID: 2321843

多长时间写出来的？
我今天也是刚写了第一篇，都不好意思贴出来，烂！

wenwenwen4444UID: 2377774

我也知道烂，管他呢，这只是个过程。

yientsui624UID: 2321843

LZ不要误会，我说我自己写的烂，嘿嘿！

wenwenwen4444UID: 2377774

本来就不好，都是四级词汇ms==

wenwenwen4444UID: 2377774

"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."


In one of the most dramatic climaxes to Formula One season in 2007, Felipe
Massa, who was one of drivers of Ferrari and graped his first position at the
beginning, obeyed the team order that enabled his teamate Kimi Rikkonen who
had the possibility of being newly-crowned world champion if he won in this
Brazilian Grand Prix to take the lead删！. Finally, Kimi Rikkonen whose first
place gave him ten points snatched his first world champion fortunately. It
is obviously that the order is unjust to Felipe Massa but beneficial to the
whole team. The lesson we can draw from the fact is clear that: (补充：just like the order above,)
categorized law as either just law that should be obeyed or unjust law that would be
disobeyed and even resisted is too extreme.

First of all, whether a law is just or unjust cannot be ambigutily judged by
one unchangeable objective theory. Just like a double-edged sword, law can be
fair to one part of people but unfair to the other part. Take the new law of
marriage in China for example, normally one couple can have only one child,
however, it is allowed to have two children by the new law if both members in
this couple are singletons. Obviously, this rule is unfair to the couple who
failing conform to the requirement and are eager to have one more child.
Therefore, is it删！ this new law just or unjust? In my view, law is a rule of
conduct that is established by custom and authority but not individual's
subjective judgement of just or unjust.        

Sencondly, the law which has been taken into practice like the rule should be
obeyed even though it is unfair to some people, otherwise the normal order
would be disturbed. There has been decades of yeas in law of marriage in
China that inhibiting intermarriage which is prevailing in hundreds of years
ago. It is assumed that people who disagree this rule and persist his old
ways, a grievous consequence will be come: more and more innate disabled
infants coming into the world for the following years would become the burden
of many families and goverment. What's more, the detrimental effects of
intermarriage will lead to the agitation and panic of public that destroy the
balance of society.         

However, with the development of contemporary society some laws will be found
unadaptable in certain situations. A survey issued by the National Bureau of
Statistic of China suggests that the average income in 2006 is approximately
the double of that in 2000. Therefore, If the law fail to be revised to
increase the standard of personal income tax accordingly by goverment, it
would hamper the progress of economy and the normal life of citizens.  

In the final analysis, law that representes and maintains the benefits and
rights of most people is not established by individual but government.  
Obeying law is us citizens' obligation no matter it seems to be just or
unjust in pesonal interest.  

观点：law是由权威制定的、符合大多数人利益的、参考了本国文化风俗习惯等，并没有一个定性的客观标准来衡量它的公正与不公正，公正的法律当然要遵守，法律在不断修正中趋于完善，个人要做的不是在修正前违背它，这势必带来自己的不幸与社会混乱，要做的是提出建议，协助政府完善法律。         

ps：第一篇撒。。。

vryUID: 2288609

楼主在自己改呢？

vryUID: 2288609

"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."


In one of the most dramatic climaxes to Formula One season in 2007, Felipe Massa, who was one of drivers of Ferrari and graped (grasped) his first position at the beginning, obeyed the team order that enabled his teamate (teammate)Kimi Rikkonen who had the possibility of being newly-crowned world champion if he won in this Brazilian Grand Prix. Finally, Kimi Rikkonen whose first place gave him ten points snatched his first world champion fortunately. It is obviously that the order is unjust to Felipe Massa but beneficial to the whole team. The lesson we can draw from the fact is clear that: just like the order above, categorized law as either just law that should be obeyed or unjust law that would be disobeyed and even resisted is too extreme.（开头的例子能不能短一点？  有点点费劲~~）

First of all, whether a law is just or unjust cannot be ambigutily (ambiguously) judged by one unchangeable objective theory. Just like a double-edged sword, law can be fair to one part of people but unfair to the other part. Take the new law of marriage in China for example, normally one couple can have only one child, however, it is allowed to have two children by the new law if both members in this couple are singletons. Obviously, this rule is unfair to the couple who failing conform to the requirement and are eager to have one more child. Therefore, is this new law just or unjust? In my view, law is a rule of conduct that is established by custom and authority but not individual's subjective judgement  of just or unjust.        

Sencondly (Secondly), the law which has been taken into practice like the rule should be obeyed even though it is unfair to some people, otherwise the normal order would be disturbed. There has been decades of yeas in law of marriage in China that inhibiting intermarriage which is prevailing in hundreds of years ago. It is assumed that people who disagree this rule and persist his old ways, a grievous consequence will be come: more and more innate disabled infants coming into the world for the following years would become the burden of many families and goverment (government). What's more, the detrimental effects of intermarriage will lead to the agitation and panic of public that destroy the balance of society.         

However, with the development of contemporary society some laws will be found unadaptable (inadaptable) in certain situations. A survey issued by the National Bureau of Statistic of China suggests that the average income in 2006 is approximately the double of that in 2000. Therefore, If the law fail to be revised to increase the standard of personal income tax accordingly by goverment(government), it would hamper the progress of economy and the normal life of citizens.  
In the final analysis, law that representes (represents) and maintains the benefits and rights of most people is not established by individual but government.  Obeying law is us citizens' obligation no matter it seems to be just or unjust in pesonal  (personal) interest.  


楼主逻辑很清楚，就是拼写要注意阿~~~
还有，我帮你把句子分回一段段了~~原来那样看着挺累的~~~

我也是第一篇，欢迎来踩
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=802277

[ 本帖最后由 vry 于 2008-2-18 01:07 编辑 ]

beetle1986UID: 2431214

In one of the most dramatic climaxes to Formula One season in 2007, Felipe Massa, who was one of drivers of Ferrari and griped his first position at the beginning, obeyed the team order that enabled his teammate Kimi Rikkonen who had the possibility of being newly-crowned world champion if he won in this Brazilian Grand Prix to take the lead. Finally, Kimi Rikkonen whose first place gave him ten points snatched his first world champion fortunately. It is obviously that the order is unjust to Felipe Massa but beneficial to the whole team. The lesson we can draw from the fact is clear that: categorized law as either just law that should be obeyed or unjust law that would be disobeyed and even resisted is too extreme.不解。这是首段，是表明立场的段落，一开始就进行论证不太好吧。

First of all, whether a law is just or unjust cannot be ambiguity judged by one unchangeable objective theory. Just like a double-edged sword, law can be fair to one part of people but unfair to the other part. Take the new law of marriage in China for example, normally one couple can have only one child, however, it is allowed to have two children by the new law if both members in this couple are singletons. Obviously, this rule is unfair to the couple who failing conform to the requirement and are eager to have one more child. Therefore, is it this new law just or unjust? In my view, law is a rule of conduct that is established by custom and authority but not individual's subjective judgment of just or unjust.        

Secondly, the law which has been taken into practice like the rule should be obeyed even though it is unfair to some people, otherwise the normal order would be disturbed. There has been decades of yeas in law of marriage in China that inhibiting intermarriage which is prevailing in hundreds of years ago. It is assumed that people who disagree this rule and persist his old ways, a grievous consequence will be come: more and more innate disabled infants coming into the world for the following years would become the burden of many families and government. What's more, the detrimental effects of intermarriage will lead to the agitation and panic of public that destroy the balance of society.         

However, with the development of contemporary society some laws will be found inadaptable in certain situations. A survey issued by the National Bureau of Statistic of China suggests that the average income in 2006 is approximately the double of that in 2000. Therefore, if the law fails to be revised to increase the standard of personal income tax accordingly by government, it would hamper the progress of economy and the normal life of citizens.  这一段好像只写了一半？论断似乎承认了有些法律不公正，可是没有说应该如何应对。而且似乎对第一段的结论形成了冲突。

In the final analysis, law that represents and maintains the benefits and rights of most people is not established by individual but government.  Obeying law is us citizens' obligation no matter it seems to be just or unjust in personal interest.            
总的来说，和argument一样，写之前先想一个逻辑性比较好的提纲会使得文章看起来思路更清晰，就算语言有不足，清晰的思想足够得一个看得过去的分数。因为语言也是我的短板，所以也不好有什么建议，一起努力吧。行百里者半九十，马上就要考了，现在不是谈论放弃的时候，一头扎进去复习就行了。

barretshaoUID: 2449682

"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."


In one of the most dramatic climaxes to Formula One season in 2007, Felipe
Massa, who was one of drivers of Ferrari and graped(grasped) his first position at the
beginning, obeyed the team order that enabled his teamate Kimi Rikkonen who
had the possibility of being newly-crowned world champion if he won in this
Brazilian Grand Prix to take the lead. Finally, Kimi Rikkonen whose first
place gave him ten points snatched his first world champion fortunately. It
is obviously that the order is unjust to Felipe Massa but beneficial to the
whole team. The lesson we can draw from the fact is clear that: categorized
law as either just law that should be obeyed or unjust law that would be
disobeyed and even resisted is too extreme. (我觉得这个例子用在这里好像不太恰当，因为如果是法律的话，不遵守则会受到法律的惩罚，而这个则是一种moral的，即便不遵守也只是受指责而已。。。[可以找个关于法律的例子。。]个人观点。。而且我觉得第一段这么写有些太长了。。)

First of all, whether a law is just or unjust cannot be ambigutily（ambiguously） judged by
one unchangeable objective theory. Just like a double-edged sword, law can be
fair to one part of people but unfair to the other part. Take the new law of
marriage in China for example, normally one couple can have only one child,
however, it is allowed to have two children by the new law if both members in
this couple are singletons. Obviously, this rule is unfair to the couple who
failing conform to the requirement and are eager to have one more child.
Therefore, is it this new law just or unjust? In my view, law is a rule of
conduct that is established by custom and authority but not individual's
subjective judgement of just or unjust.      

Sencondly,(Secondly) the law which has been taken into practice like the rule should be
obeyed even though it is unfair to some people, otherwise the normal order
would be disturbed. There has been decades of yeas in law of marriage in
China that inhibiting intermarriage which is prevailing in hundreds of years
ago. It is assumed that people who disagree this rule and persist his old
ways, a grievous consequence will be come: more and more innate disabled
infants coming into the world for the following years would become the burden
of many families and goverment. What's more, the detrimental effects of
intermarriage will lead to the agitation and panic of public that destroy the
balance of society.      

However, with the development of contemporary society some laws will be found
unadaptable (inadaptable)in certain situations. A survey issued by the National Bureau of
Statistic of China suggests that the average income in 2006 is approximately
the double of that in 2000. Therefore, If the law fail to be revised to
increase the standard of personal income tax accordingly by goverment, it
would hamper the progress of economy and the normal life of citizens.  

In the final analysis, law that representes and maintains the benefits and
rights of most people is not established by individual but government.  
Obeying law is us citizens' obligation no matter it seems to be just or
unjust in pesonal interest.        
LZ的文章逻辑挺清楚的。不过这样全面否定有一定的危险性。。我觉得写成平衡观点也是不错的。。。像有些law还是要反对的。。像什么Genghis Khan of Yuan Dynasty in China, he passed an act that all people were devided in several levels and mongol belonged to the highest level.这种我们就要反对。。否则社会就无法进步了（个人观点）