issue 17 FLY AW 小组第五次作业

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

The statement above claims that, based on the classification of laws into two categories: just and unjust, the just should be obeyed, while the unjust should be rejected. Plausible as it seems to be, the view indicates that it is utopian to divide the laws into two extreme parts mentioned above, since the value toward the just and the unjust is to some extent subjective, determined by the class level, interests and value system of an individual. Still, I recommend that laws existing in a society should be obeyed, for the sake of stability of a society.
The definition of laws varied among people with different class, background and education system. Laws may be considered unjust, even unreasonable by a particular group of individuals yet valued as the symbol of impartiality by others. For example, under a society with the color bar, the laws may not allow the color to tropes the block of the white, yet in another society with freedom and equality, such items should be expurgated from the code with no doubt. Hence, it may be ideal to settle the border line so-called just and unjust laws.
History tells us that direct disobedience to the laws, which were viewed as unjust by a group of people, is usually counterproductive, rather than promoting the welfare of this group and gaining human rights functioning according to the way it should be. The breach of laws further distructs the fabrication of the system and the society, thus resulting in chaos.
Due to unclear classification of the laws and divergent views hold by people from different classes, hardly a common standard could be established. Yet the class who own the dominion is certain in a particular time and a particular space. Since the law is a tool for the gerent to govern the society, keeping it stable and sustained-developing, unjust as it might be, laws should be obeyed and revered with no doubt, for the sake of maintaining the power of laws, thus resulting in the stability of the society as a whole.
Though personal attitudes toward the laws differ, the lack of uniformity of justice should not hamper people's endeavor to ameliorate the jurisdiction system, on the basis that direct disobedience and resistance is not recommended. The alternative approach can be adopted to act as a role to accomplish the goal of justice without radical actions. The legislation reform, as a better execution of gaining the justice provides the civilians a peaceful and effective way to point out and complain the deficiencies of the decree, further to pressure the agency or institutes to inspect the legitimate of the laws and make necessary changes. This means, at least partly, offers a sound approach to weed out unjust laws without people's radical disobedience and resistance.
In conclusion, in the interest of the serenity and stability of the society, the laws, as long as accepted by the majority, should be obeyed without doubt. Even some drawbacks of the statue usually do not deserve radical actions, such as disobedience or even revolution. The sound mechanism that involves the supervision and self-improving processes by the public could ameliorate the law system as well, even more effectively, to gain the goal of relative justice for the majority.

exp03UID: 2158827

相对于这样一个题目来说结构很清晰，用词和句式也很复杂，我写不了这么好。

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

修改稿～
"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."

The statement above claims that, based on the classification of laws into two categories: just and unjust, the just should be obeyed, while the unjust should be rejected. Plausible as it seems to be, the view indicates that it is excessive utopian to divide the laws into two extreme groups, since the value toward the just and the unjust is to some extent subjective, determined by the class level, interests and value system of an individual. Still, I recommend that laws existing in a society should be obeyed for the sake of stability of a society, despite their detailed classsification.
估计只有最后一句会被判为thesis sentence

To begin with, I fundamentally disagree the too extreme classification of laws. After all, the definition of laws varied among people due to different classes, backgrounds and education systems. Laws may be considered unjust or unreasonable by a certain group in a society yet valued as the symbol of impartiality by other ones. For example, under a society with the color bar, the laws may not allow the color to set foot on the block of the white, yet in another society with absolute freedom and equality, such items have be expurgated from the code. In actuality, more complex and systematic classifications have been achieved on the basis of different values and beliefs. Hence, it may be ideal to settle the borderline between the so-called just and unjust laws.

Due to unclear classification of the laws and divergent views hold by people from different classes, hardly a common standard could be established. Yet the class who own the dominion is certain in a particular time and a particular space. Since the law is a tool for the gerent to govern the society, keeping it stable and sustained-developing. Unjust as it might be, laws should be obeyed and revered with no doubt, for the sake of maintaining the power of laws, thus resulting in the stability of the society as a whole. 可以谈及法律的几个作用，维护社会稳定和发展，商业的运行，惩治犯罪等

History tells us that direct disobedience to the laws, which were viewed as unjust by a group of people, is usually counterproductive, rather than promoting the welfare of this group and gaining human rights functioning according to the way it should be. The breach of laws further distructs the fabrication of the system and the society, thus resulting in chaos.直接反对法律是不好滴~但少例子可放入下一段对比分析，说明可通过文明的途径改善法律体系

Though personal attitudes toward the laws differ, the lack of uniformity of justice should not hamper people's endeavor to ameliorate the jurisdiction system, on the basis that direct disobedience and resistance is not recommended. The alternative approach can be adopted to act as a role to accomplish the goal of justice without radical actions. The legislation reform, as a better execution of gaining the justice provides the civilians a peaceful and effective way to point out and complain the deficiencies of the decree, further to pressure the agency or institutes to inspect the legitimate of the laws and make necessary changes. This means, at least partly, offers a sound approach to weed out unjust laws without people's radical disobedience and resistance.

In conclusion, in the interest of the serenity and stability of the society, the laws, as long as accepted by the majority, should be obeyed without doubt. Even some drawbacks of the statue usually do not deserve radical actions, such as disobedience or revolution. The sound mechanism that involves the supervision and self-improving processes by the public could ameliorate the law system as well, even more effectively, to gain the goal of relative justice for the majority.