issue17【today is the day】第十次作业 by revealiing

revealingUID: 2507748

OPIC: ISSUE17 - "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."

Are there only two types of laws? Should people in a society resist unjust laws? Which is more important, obedience or disobedience? Obviously, people will find it almost impossible to come to an agreement on the highly controversial issue due to their different experiences and conflicting values. In the last analysis, I am more inclined to oppose both the assertions in the title of the statement.

Consider the first claims that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. But, in fact, whether a law is just or unjust is a complex issue indeed. Like it or not, there is no absolute fairness at all. People judge a law according to their own attitudes and values and even religion. The laws on abortion are representative cases in point. Someone may recognize these laws as serious deprivations of the right to life, while others-especially most women-may call for more freedom for choices. Similarly, the laws on execution are also under dispute. And so on. Therefore, it is over-simple to categorize all laws in just two types. Besides, as the progress of society and the advancement of human being, no law can always catch the pace of era, thus just laws in the past might become unjust ones in the future. To some extent, just and unjust are relative and comparative-even more subjective; saying nothing of obeying or not.

Consider the second claims that it is more important for every individual in society to resist unjust laws rather than to obey just laws. However, as the case stands, the latter might be more crucial and vital. In the first place, laws are brought out by authorities and legislatures and they are formed in long-term process, so most laws are reasonable and just to obey. In the second place, the responsibility to obey just laws can make our society stable and orderly. Just like in a war, we concede that perhaps not all commands are sound and right, but generally speaking the soldiers must obey all of them with no more suspicion. If all soldiers only obey these commands that they take for just but disobey those that are so-called unjust, how the army will be? It must be in a state of disunity and cannot withstand a single blow. The conditions of laws and societies are equally the same. Perhaps we have the right to oppose and resist unjust laws, but we had better obey them until they are changed by legal systems.

Nonetheless, admittedly, resistance to unjust laws can improve the laws and lead to a better society eventually. For example, Martin Luther King, winner of Noble Peace Prize, resisted the unfair Jim Crow laws and fought for racial equality in the United States. His brave action caused great impacts, thus most Black populations were encouraged to disobey these unjust laws and to gain their rights as the White people. Today, the ethnic problem is not as serious as before, because Martin's resistance and disobedience made great contributions to the society. Without his efforts, we cannot imagine how the society would be today. Only through disobeying and resisting, unreasonable points in a law can be placed enough emphasis, so we can change it more acceptable and more just. As a result, just as the famous saying goes, “going too far is as bad as going not far enough.” Proper resistance and obedience can lead to progress and development of laws and societies.

To sum up, in my view of point above, it is slightly better to obey but not resist because of the subjective attitudes to justice. However, without disobedience to unjust laws, we cannot gain advancement; while without obedience to just laws, we cannot be in stable. Thus, we should call for a balance between obedience and disobedience.

tingtingjennyUID: 2431377

OPIC: ISSUE17 - "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."

Are there only two types of laws? Should people in a society resist unjust laws? Which is more important, obedience or disobedience? Obviously, people will find it almost impossible to come to an agreement on the highly controversial issue due to their different experiences and conflicting values. In the last analysis, I am more inclined to oppose both the assertions in the title of the statement.

Consider the first claims that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. But, in fact, whether a law is just or unjust is a complex issue indeed. Like it or not, there is no absolute fairness at all. People judge a law according to their own attitudes and values and even religion. The laws on abortion are representative cases in point. Someone may recognize these laws as serious deprivations of the right to life, while others-especially most women-may call for more freedom for choices. Similarly, the laws on execution are also under dispute. And so on. Therefore, it is over-simple to categorize all laws in just two types. Besides, as the progress of society and the advancement of human being, no law can always catch the pace of era, thus just laws in the past might become unjust ones in the future. To some extent, just and unjust are relative and comparative-even more subjective; saying nothing of obeying or not.

Consider the second claims that it is more important for every individual in society to resist unjust laws rather than to obey just laws. However, as the case stands, the latter might be more crucial and vital. In the first place, laws are brought out by authorities and legislatures and they are formed in long-term process, so most laws are reasonable and just to obey. In the second place, the responsibility to obey just laws can make our society stable and orderly. Just like in a war, we concede that perhaps not all commands are sound and right, but generally speaking the soldiers must obey all of them with no more suspicion. If all soldiers only obey these commands that they take for just but disobey those that are so-called unjust, how the army will be? It must be in a state of disunity and cannot withstand a single blow. The conditions of laws and societies are equally the same. Perhaps we have the right to oppose and resist unjust laws, but we had better obey them until they are changed by legal systems.例子举的挺好!

Nonetheless, admittedly, resistance to unjust laws can improve the laws and lead to a better society eventually. For example, Martin Luther King, winner of Noble Peace Prize, resisted the unfair Jim Crow laws and fought for racial equality in the United States. His brave action caused great impacts, thus most Black populations were encouraged to disobey these unjust laws and to gain their rights as the White people. Today, the ethnic problem is not as serious as before, because Martin's resistance and disobedience made great contributions to the society. Without his efforts, we cannot imagine how the society would be today. Only through disobeying and resisting, unreasonable points in a law can be placed enough emphasis, so we can change it more acceptable and more just. As a result, just as the famous saying goes, “going too far is as bad as going not far enough.” Proper resistance and obedience can lead to progress and development of laws and societies.例子最后,TODAY 前面是不是要加个说适当的抵抗比较好啊? 和后面也可以呼应起来.而且他是呼吁黑人文明的去讲道理的...

To sum up, in my view of point above, it is slightly better to obey but not resist because of the subjective attitudes to justice. However, without disobedience to unjust laws, we cannot gain advancement; while without obedience to just laws, we cannot be in stable. Thus, we should call for a balance between obedience and disobedience.挺好的, 已经挺成熟的了.