Issue17【超越自我小组】第一次作业

apjackUID: 2381599

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.

I cannot utterly concur with the author’s dual claims. First, the author oversimplifies the distinction of laws: just and unjust. Laws are intricate, particular in certain extents which are vague and ambiguous to conspicuously separate. Second, the author emphasizes that every individual should not only obey just laws, but also disobey and resist unjust laws. It is true that disobeying unfair laws sometimes lead to a better society.

Consider first the author discerns laws as two categories: just and unjust. However, in my observation, whether laws are just or unjust seems to be ambiguous. Law system varies from place to place; law systems in Hong Kong are in fact different to that in Mainland, and also different to that in America. Capital punishment in Mainland and licit euthanasia in America are apropos examples to illustrate the law discrepancy among these societies. These examples are only the tip of iceberg among diversity of law systems in the world. And while reasonable people with different cultural and religious viewpoints might challenge what make these laws or regulations are proper in these days. Herein, I would like to point out that it is sometimes really difficult for individuals to evidently distinguish just and unjust laws. Fortunately, legislature and court often provide reliable clarification, amendment or even abolishment for unjust law.

Consider next adhering to laws which are conspicuously just accepting widely by the public beneficial to both every individual and our society as a whole. Laws basically help needy people of our society who should obtain fundamental rights and services as opulent people have. For instance, some laws provide for basic remuneration to low-income workers who worked at McDonald or KFC, or to foreign maids; for loans to students who might not be able to pursue regular education; and for mandatory insurance and health care subsidy to the elderly who cannot afford expensive diagnostic services. Moreover, laws help to maintain a peaceful and orderly society by antagonizing robbery, bribe, murder and other crimes, thereby more efforts can be put on other aspects including economical, technological and political developments.

Finally, disobeying unjust laws sometimes expedite the development of society into a better extent. As an increasingly communication and cooperation across national and cultural boundaries, the conflict of old-fashioned and unjust laws could undermine the healthy development among various ethnic and racial groups. Using non-violent means against these laws or regulations would be appreciated. Consider an illustrative example Martin Luther King who devoted himself to strive for the rights of black people in US through civil disobedience and other non-violent means. King and his advocates successfully ended segregation and racial discrimination; therefore a more harmonic and stable society is constituted. And an even latest example is Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23 legislation which deeply threatens speaks freedom of mass media and individuals, and provides absolute authorization to the police. In the aftermath, the bill was withdrawn after massive demonstration on 1 July; and the society has remained healthy and prosperous, but rather than agitating and grumbling. Furthermore, an increasing concern for government policies and individual rights has been observed in society. In short, apropos and judicious disobedience against unjust laws and issues would not disturb or even devastate the order of society, whereas it could bring a better society by greater harmony, stability and respect.

To sum up, when it comes whether a law is just or unjust, it is difficult to obviously determine by every individual; nevertheless, legislature and court often provide further clarification or amendment for unjust law. Sometimes disobeying unjust laws also hastens a better society development with several features: harmony, stability and respect. In a final analysis, I fundamentally agree with the author’s claim that every individual of society should obey just laws, and more importantly confront unfair laws.


/////////////////////////////////////////

I am sorry for my late.
It is very challenging to me.
求狠批, 我不怕痛.

[ 本帖最后由 apjack 于 2008-8-14 15:34 编辑 ]

graceruruUID: 2103987

I cannot utterly concur with the author’s dual claims. First, the author oversimplifies the distinction of laws: just and unjust. Laws are intricate, particular in certain extents which are vague and ambiguous to conspicuously separate. (This sentence is a little bit confusion, will this be better?  Laws are intricate, and some of them are ambiguous which make us difficult to distinguish them conspicuously under certain circumstances. I think you don’t have to use both vague and ambiguous here, for they have almost the same meaning. ) Second, the author emphasizes that every individual should not only obeys just laws, but also disobeys and resist unjust laws. It is true that disobeying (Disobey or Disobeying? It’s a question. I think it may be “disobey”, but just by my instinct) unfair laws sometimes lead to a better society.

Consider first the author discerns laws as two categories: just and unjust. However, in my observation, whether laws are just or unjust seems to be ambiguous. Law system varies from place to place; law systems in Hong Kong are in fact different to that in Mainland, and also different to that in(of) America. Capital punishment in Mainland and licit euthanasia in America are apropos examples to illustrate the law discrepancy among these societies. These examples are only the tip of iceberg among diversity of law systems in the world. And while reasonable people with different cultural and religious viewpoints might challenge what make these laws or regulations are proper in these days(I think here may be a little grammar mistake). Herein, I would like to point out that it is sometimes really difficult for individuals to evidently distinguish just and unjust laws. Fortunately, legislature and court often provide reliable clarification, amendment or even abolishment for unjust law.

Consider next adhering to laws which are conspicuously just accepting widely by the public beneficial to both every individual and our society as a whole. (Sorry, this sentence is really confusion) Laws basically help needy people of our society who should obtain fundamental rights and services as opulent people have. For instance, some laws provide for basic remuneration to low-income workers who worked at McDonald or KFC, or to foreign maids; for loans to students who might not be able to pursue regular education; and for mandatory insurance and health care subsidy to the elderly who cannot afford expensive diagnostic services. Moreover, laws help to maintain a peaceful and orderly society by antagonizing robbery, bribe, murder and other crimes, thereby more efforts can be put on other aspects including economical, technological and political developments.

Finally, disobeying unjust laws sometimes expedite the development of society into a better extent. (I think just end the sentence at society is OK) As an increasingly communication and cooperation across national and cultural boundaries, the conflict of old-fashioned and unjust laws could undermine the healthy development( is this too Chinglish? 健康的发展， healthy development ….. sound development is better ) among various ethnic and racial groups. Using non-violent means against these laws or regulations would be appreciated. Consider an illustrative example Martin Luther King who devoted himself to strive for the rights of black people in US through civil disobedience and other non-violent means. King and his advocates successfully ended segregation and racial discrimination; therefore a more harmonic and stable society is constituted. And an even latest example is Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23 legislation which deeply threatens speaks freedom of mass media and individuals, and provides absolute authorization to the police. In the aftermath, the bill was withdrawn after massive demonstration on 1 July; and the society has remained healthy and prosperous, but rather than agitating and grumbling. Furthermore, an increasing concern for government policies and individual rights has been observed in society. In short, apropos and judicious disobedience against unjust laws and issues would not disturb or even devastate the order of society, whereas it could bring a better society by greater harmony, stability and respect.
(I like this paragraph, your example of Hong kong meets your point very well.)

To sum up, when it comes whether a law is just or unjust, it is difficult to obviously( clearly maybe better ?) determine by every individual; nevertheless, legislature and court often provide further clarification or amendment for unjust law. Sometimes disobeying unjust laws also hastens a better society development with several features: harmony, stability and respect. In a final analysis, I fundamentally agree with the author’s claim that every individual of society should obey just laws, and more importantly confront unfair laws.

(Snake, I think your issue is fabulous! Go on hard working ! and I believe you’ll get a full mark in issue)

[ 本帖最后由 graceruru 于 2008-8-6 23:42 编辑 ]

apjackUID: 2381599

Thx your suggestion. Dragon.
I have revised several locations.
However, I have several questions.

1. I don't think it is wrong, there should be no "s" attached to the verbs - obey, disobey, as well as resist.
The author emphasizes that every individual should not only obey just laws, but also disobey and resist unjust laws.

2.Furthermore, I have asked a guy about the appropriateness of using healthy or sound before development. That guy told he will choose healthy, rather than sound.
As an increasing communication and cooperation across national and cultural boundaries, the conflict of old-fashioned and unjust laws could undermine the healthy development among various ethnic and racial groups.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I cannot utterly concur with the author’s dual claims. First, the author oversimplifies the distinction of laws: just and unjust. Laws are intricate, and some of them are ambiguous which make us difficult to distinguish them conspicuously under certain circumstances. Second, the author emphasizes that every individual should not only obey just laws, but also disobey and resist unjust laws. In my opinion, disobeying unfair laws sometimes lead to a better society, but rather than agitate a society.

Consider first the author discerns laws as two categories: just and unjust. However, in my observation, whether laws are just or unjust seems to be ambiguous. Law system varies from place to place; law systems in Hong Kong are in fact different to that in Mainland, and also different to that in America. Capital punishment in Mainland and licit euthanasia in America are apropos examples to illustrate the law discrepancy among these societies. These examples are only the tip of iceberg among diversity of law systems in the world. Facing with these laws, reasonable people with different cultural and religious viewpoints might challenge about what make these laws or regulations properly these days. Herein, I would like to point out that it is sometimes really difficult for individuals to evidently distinguish just and unjust laws. Fortunately, legislature and court often provide reliable clarification, amendment or even abolishment for unjust law.

Consider next adhering to conspicuously just laws accepted widely by the public could be beneficial to both every individual and society as a whole. Laws basically help needy people of our society who should obtain fundamental rights and services as opulent people have. For instance, some laws provide for basic remuneration to low-income workers who worked at McDonald or KFC, or to foreign maids; for loans to students who might not be able to pursue regular education; and for mandatory insurance and health care subsidy to the elderly who cannot afford expensive diagnostic services. Moreover, laws help to maintain a peaceful and orderly society by antagonizing robbery, bribe, murder and other crimes, thereby more efforts can be put on other aspects including economical, technological and political developments.

Finally, disobeying unjust laws sometimes expedite the development of society to a better extent. As an increasing communication and cooperation across national and cultural boundaries, the conflict of old-fashioned and unjust laws could undermine the healthy development among various ethnic and racial groups. Using non-violent means against these laws or regulations would be appreciated. Consider an illustrative example Martin Luther King who devoted himself to strive for the rights of black people in US through civil disobedience and other non-violent means. King and his advocates successfully ended segregation and racial discrimination; therefore a more harmonic and stable society is constituted. And an even latest example is Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23 legislation which deeply threatens speaks freedom of mass media and individuals, and provides absolute authorization to the police. In the aftermath, the bill was withdrawn after massive demonstration on 1 July; and the society has remained healthy and prosperous, but rather than agitating and grumbling. Furthermore, an increasing concern for government policies and individual rights has been observed in society. In short, apropos and judicious disobedience against unjust laws and issues would not disturb or even devastate the order of society, whereas it could bring a better society by greater harmony, stability and respect.

To sum up, when it comes whether a law is just or unjust, it is difficult to clearly determine by every individual; nevertheless, legislature and court often provide further clarification or amendment for unjust law. Sometimes disobeying unjust laws also hastens a better society development with several features: harmony, stability and respect. In a final analysis, I fundamentally agree with the author’s claim that every individual of society should obey just laws, and more importantly confront unfair laws.