issue17 [Jet小组]第八次作业～欢迎互拍^^

leftkissUID: 2347956

:)
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." [05/38; 06/8]
有两种法律：公平的和不公平的。社会中的每个人都应该遵守公平的法律，更重要的是，不遵守或者违抗不公平的法律。

字数：443
The speaker's claim that there is only just law which each individual should obey and unjust law to which social people have even important responsibility disobey and project. I find the statement to be suspicious in some facets. To better present my perspective, I will illustrate it in details.

To begin with, there is no clear definition to distinguish unjust and just law. Different conclusions can be drawn from different aspects. For instance, laws stop people from smoking and drinking who under 16 years old. From the public’s, the law is just according to ordinary sense that smoking and drinking may hurt health badly at very young age. However, from the view of the teenagers, they probably think the law is unjust to them because it restricts their freedom in some extend. Another topical example is euthanasia, when faced this question, people usually trapped in a dilemma, there is no discipline to easily critic whether the euthanasia just or unjust, considering the moral and ethic. Should the government support or project this act? It is still a controversial problem.

Furthermore, the law has the most important function to regular the public and keeps everything in order. We can hardly image that what our society could be without laws. Once people think a rule to be unjust, they disobey and resist it without considerable thinking. This phenomenon may lead to a severe chaos consequently. Disobedience of the law possibly brings us disadvantages such as posing certain risks, jeopardizing the public construction and so forth. Considering that people seek their own convenience by violating the traffic rules at will, driving would be dangerous and chaotic. On the other hand, the one will get punishment--whether he/she considers the law just or not--if he/she breaks the law.

Admittedly, the law has its own fallacy which needs to be rectified (amended). For example, the Constitution of the United States has received the 27th Amendment which made the law integrate step by step. The constitution would be changed continuously unless it is perfect and cater to every individual's taste. Though amending again and again, the unjust law in the eyes of some people is probably rectified to just sooner or later. According to this situation, there is no reason to violate laws in a hurry.

In summary, from the discussion above, we can safely draw the conclusion that the speaker's assertion is unreasonable in that it divides just laws and unjust laws and overlooks the significant functions legal system is to ensure a democratic and harmonious society. Moreover, the laws are changing all the time according to the social taste in order to make the legal system integrate.

[ 本帖最后由 leftkiss 于 2008-2-18 22:43 编辑 ]