issue17 just&unjust laws (45分钟限时） 拍必回

yuemingjushiUID: 2108406

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.

Is everyone responsible for obeying just laws and even more importantly, disobeying and resisting unjust laws? The speaker claims so. It seems that, since laws are made by authority of a society instead of the majority, it is valid for people to complain about the unjust laws. However, I do not quite agree with the speaker, for the reason that laws are carried out to guarantee the stability of a society and protect the rights of majority，as is illustrated by following discussions.

To begin with, laws, with its power of compulsion, carried out so carefully in early every country, in order that the majority's daily lives could be effectively protected. Since most of the laws all over the world are made by authority of each nation which consists of the most intelligence elite of such nations, nearly all of the laws are just, so just that they really make a effective way for us to live in a normal society. Society could not be operated only by the protection of morality, which, tells people what to do and what not to do without a regulation concerning the punishment in case someone do what he or she should not do. It is only tribal people who could live in such societies without any stable laws, yet they were not fortunate enough to live in a modern time. Consider the most progressive nations in our modern society，none of them do not possess a stable law with compulsion. As a result, stable laws are symbols of a stable society.

Secondly, as is so often pointed out, everyone is equal in front of laws. If anyone, who thought there are a few laws which are unjust, resists obeying such laws, how would other people think of him and the laws? Perhaps lots of people could find lots of laws that are considered to be "unjust" and thus resist accepting it. After that, a catastrophe will come, for criminals has "just" reasons to do "unjust" things simply because they could also find laws unjust for them, and it is natural for them to disobey it.

Admittedly, there are some laws which are unjust for a certain amount of people. E.g. the charging for parking cars seems to be an unwarranted regulation for most of the drivers in big cities. However, it effectively protected the environment for most other people. We cannot rule out the possibility that there are other ways in which we can also achieve such a goal, yet none of us has proposed such a way (if there is any). Therefore, the best way for us to go is to obey the laws, no matter whether it is considered to be just or unjust.

To draw a conclusion, on balance, I suggest we try our best to obey every law if we can not find method to improve those which we call "unjust laws", because each of the laws is worked out compulsorily and ensures our quotidian lives to some extent. Without the stability of laws, we cannot necessarily reach the stability of our society.

augustinehitUID: 182871

Is everyone responsible for obeying just laws and even more importantly, disobeying and resisting unjust laws? The speaker claims so. It seems that, since laws are made by authority of a society instead of the majority, it is valid for people to complain about the unjust laws. However, I do not quite agree with the speaker, for the reason that laws are carried out to guarantee the stability of a society and protect the rights of majority，as is illustrated by following discussions.

To begin with, laws, with its power of compulsion, (are) carried out so carefully in early every country, in order that the majority's daily lives could be effectively protected. Since most of the laws all over the world are made by authority of each nation which consists of the most intelligence elite (elites) of such nations, nearly all of the laws are just, so just that they really make a (an) effective way for us to live in a normal society. Society could not be operated only by the protection of morality, which, tells people what to do and what not to do without a regulation concerning the punishment in case someone do what he or she should not do. It is only tribal people who could live in such societies without any stable laws, yet they were not fortunate enough to live in a modern time. Consider the most progressive nations in our modern society，none of them do not possess a stable law with compulsion. As a result, stable laws are symbols of a stable society.

Secondly, as is so often pointed out（不通顺）, everyone is equal in front of laws. If anyone, who thought there are a few laws which are unjust, resists obeying such laws, how（what） would other people think of him and the laws? Perhaps lots of people could find lots of laws that are considered to be "unjust" and thus resist accepting it. After that, a catastrophe will come, for criminals has "just" reasons to do "unjust" things simply because they could also find laws unjust for them, and it is natural for them to disobey it.(最好在段首提出论点)

Admittedly, there are some laws which are unjust for a certain amount of people. E.g.（最好不要这样写） the charging for parking cars seems to be an unwarranted regulation for most of the drivers in big cities. However, it effectively protected the environment for most other people. We cannot rule out the possibility that there are other ways in which we can also achieve such a goal, yet none of us has proposed such a way (if there is any). Therefore, the best way for us to go is to obey the laws, no matter whether it is considered to be just or unjust. （说得不很充分）

To draw a conclusion, on balance, I suggest we try our best to obey every law if we can not find method to improve those which we call "unjust laws", because each of the laws is worked out compulsorily and ensures our quotidian lives to some extent. Without the stability of laws, we cannot necessarily reach the stability of our society.（结尾不错）

yuemingjushiUID: 2108406

谢谢。
留下链接

yeshunUID: 2117489

Is everyone responsible for obeying just laws and even more importantly, disobeying and resisting unjust laws? The speaker claims so. It seems that, since laws are made by authority of a society instead of the majority, it is valid for people to complain about the unjust laws. However, I do not quite agree with the speaker, for the reason that laws are carried out to guarantee the stability of a society and protect the rights of majority，as is illustrated by following discussions.

To begin with, laws, with its power of compulsion, (are)carried out so carefully in early every country, in order that the majority's daily lives could be effectively protected. Since most of the laws all over the world are made by authority of each nation which consists of the most intelligence elite of such nations, nearly all of the laws are just(有点...laws是否just随时间的变化会改变的，加个at least in current times, 个人觉得没必要说laws是否都是just，关键是对于just laws要遵守！)
, so just that they really make a(an) effective way for us to live in a normal society. Society could not be operated only by the protection of morality, which, tells people what to do and what not to do without a regulation concerning the punishment in case someone do what he or she should not do. It is only tribal people who could live in such societies without any stable laws, yet they were not fortunate enough to live in a modern time. Consider the most progressive nations in our modern society(比如美国阿,老美看了肯定高兴,hehe)，none of them do not possess a stable law with compulsion. As a result, stable laws are symbols of a stable society.

Secondly, as is so often pointed out, everyone is equal in front of laws. If anyone, who thought there are a few laws which are unjust, resists obeying such laws, how would other people think of him and the laws? Perhaps lots of people could find lots of laws that are considered to be "unjust" and thus resist accepting it. After that, a catastrophe will come, for criminals has "just" reasons to do "unjust" things simply because they could also find laws unjust for them, and it is natural for them to disobey it.

(上面从正反两方面说,感觉还不错,hehe)

Admittedly, there are some laws which are unjust for a certain amount of people. (为什么呢？可以论述由于背景、利益等，充实一下)E.g. the charging for parking cars seems to be an unwarranted regulation for most of the drivers in big cities. However, it effectively protected the environment for most other people. We cannot rule out the possibility that there are other ways in which we can also achieve such a goal, yet none of us has proposed such a way (if there is any). Therefore, the best way for us to go is to obey the laws, no matter whether it is considered to be just or unjust.

To draw a conclusion, on balance, I suggest we try our best to obey every law if we can not find method to improve those which we call "unjust laws"(有歧义，如果暂时找不到好的方法修正，就可以不遵守了？), because each of the laws is worked out compulsorily and ensures our quotidian lives to some extent. Without the stability of laws, we cannot necessarily reach the stability of our society.

mine: http://edu.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=313719&extra=page%3D1 很不满意

[ Last edited by yeshun on 2005-8-7 at 18:26 ]

yuemingjushiUID: 2108406

谢谢建议，
你的文章的修改意见我明天贴

davidjackyUID: 135962

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.

Is everyone responsible for obeying just laws and even more importantly, disobeying and resisting unjust laws? 改写题目，很好的替换句式The speaker claims so. It seems that, since laws are made by authority of a society instead of the majority, it is valid for people to complain about the unjust laws. However, I do not quite agree with the speaker, for the reason that laws are carried out to guarantee the stability of a society and protect the rights of majority，as is illustrated by following discussions.

To begin with, laws, with its power of compulsion, carried out so carefully in early every country, in order that the majority's daily lives could be effectively protected. Since most of the laws all over the world are made by authority of each nation which consists of the most intelligence elite of such nations, nearly all of the laws are just, so just that they really make a effective way for us to live in a normal society. Society could not be operated only by the protection of morality, which, tells people what to do and what not to do without a regulation concerning the punishment in case someone do what he or she should not do. It is only tribal people who could live in such societies without any stable laws, yet they were not fortunate enough to live in a modern time. Consider the most progressive nations in our modern society，none of them do not possess a stable law with compulsion. As a result, stable laws are symbols of a stable society.

Secondly, as is so often pointed out, everyone is equal in front of laws. If anyone, who thought there are a few laws which are unjust, resists obeying such laws, how would other people think of him and the laws? Perhaps lots of people could find lots of laws that are considered to be "unjust" and thus resist accepting it. After that, a catastrophe will come, for criminals has "just" reasons to do "unjust" things simply because they could also find laws unjust for them, and it is natural for them to disobey it.

Admittedly, there are some laws which are unjust for a certain amount of people. E.g. the charging for parking cars seems to be an unwarranted regulation for most of the drivers in big cities. However, it effectively protected the environment for most other people. We cannot rule out the possibility that there are other ways in which we can also achieve such a goal, yet none of us has proposed such a way (if there is any). Therefore, the best way for us to go is to obey the laws, no matter whether it is considered to be just or unjust.

To draw a conclusion, on balance, I suggest we try our best to obey every law if we can not find method to improve those which we call "unjust laws", because each of the laws is worked out compulsorily and ensures our quotidian lives to some extent. Without the stability of laws, we cannot necessarily reach the stability of our society.


全文论述较好，个别细节问题再注意一下。比如说if there is any=if any即可。

yuemingjushiUID: 2108406

谢谢建议