Issue17 【米国有米】第七次作业

bluecathyUID: 2231215

Issue17 [米国有米]第七次作业
作者：bluecathy

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."  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。

[提纲]：
1.任何法律，都是一种对其所在社会的最大限度内的平衡的赋予与限制，它给人们权利，但也给人们限制。在法律范围内，只有相对的自由而没有绝对的正确。所以，将法律简单地分为公平与不公平的本身就值得商榷。
2.对社会中的每一个人来说，从其视角内观察法律都会不同的。比如安乐死，在信仰宗教的一些人眼中，它违反了教义，人不可自行结束自己的生命。但在另外一些人眼中，安乐死是对每一个来到这世界上的人的一个善举。无法说清安乐死到底是否应该以及公平，但一定是在当地到达最多数的平衡。
3.每个人都应该遵守法律不假，因为这才能为社会带来最大范围内的和谐，但并不是看见自己眼中不公平的法律，每个人都应该不遵守甚至抵抗。再说回安乐死，一个人不能因为自己认为安乐死是不公平的就去抵制甚至戕害那些认定安乐死是公平的人，或是实施安乐死的医生或支持亲人安乐死的家属。在法治社会内，即使认为哪些法律条款有待商榷，也应在法律允许的范围内寻求解决的途径。
4.现代社会飞速发展，科技新知会为我们带来更多不同的问题，相信我们的法律系统也会跟上时代的脚步，按照最大多数的人意见修建更完善的法律。

[正文]：
Laws, the body of rules and principles governing the affairs of a community and enforced by a political authority. Concerning the laws, the author classifies the laws into two types- just and unjust and claims that people in our society should not only obey the just laws, but also disobey the unjust ones. In my opinion, this view is fundamentally ignoring the significance of law and incontrovertible constancy of legal system.

To begin with, it is discussible to make laws simply categorized into just and unjust ones. As we all know, any kind of laws in one community or one society is a maximum balance of rights between the giving and restricting. The laws give every individual both of the rights and restrictions, there are relative rights and no absolute restrictions. The same law may be different through one individual's eye from another's. Whether a law is just or not is more of a subjective issue that differs according to personal interests, social class and value system. Thus it lacks of consideration that categorized the laws in this way.

Let's take euthanasia for example. For the people who believe in a certain religion, laws which empower the dying patients the rights to operate mercy killing are unjust, because they think people don't have the freedom and rights to end their life which were given by gods. Meanwhile for the other people who believe other religions or have no religions, laws are just because people have the rights to choose, they could choose to live and also to die, even more, they think euthanasia may be a great mercy for those who are dying. It is difficult for us to judge whether the euthanasia is right or wrong, but it is certain that the local law about euthanasia must be accordant with great majority. Besides the personal value system, the different views of laws may generate due to personal interests. For instance, one law in Vienna prohibits the inhabitants from using air-condition for protecting the environment of this ancient capital. In the eyes of Vienna people, it is just and considerate for the environment, climate and future life, while as for people elsewhere, this law which may cause old people to feel comfortable even get sick in summer may be regarded as unjust. Therefore, it should be determined on a case-by-case basis rather than arbitrarily lineated an explicit line between these two kinds of laws.

Besides how to think of the justice of laws, there is no deny that every individual should obey the laws, for the laws are based on the interests and wills of majority. Taking the highway code means as an example, it requires people drive on the right side of the road, turn right or left on the very time and act following the traffic light. Only when people obey the rules, there will be a smooth traffic, if not so, there must be a traffic jam, even a threat to people's life. Therefore, the compliance with the laws will not only bring us a harmonious society, but also make people a guarantee of basic living.

However, it is truly reasonless to disobey or resist the laws which are unjust through a certain individual's eye. The unjust laws often are the results of unawareness of the legislator or the changing social conditions, consequently, in order to improve and build up a legal system which could keep abreast of the times, what every individual should do is to seek a way to solve like taking a large-scale discussion of the very law, catching more and more peoples' attentions, but rather to disobey or resist deliberately. If the resistance to the law is encouraged, people may do something extreme to show his incompliance and defiance, which would result in a disorder out of peoples' original intention. Considering the euthanasia example again, a person who disagree with freedom of euthanasia may oppose, inveigh or even murder the people who are with euthanasia, the euthanasia patient's family, or even the doctors who do the mercy killing. Maybe just because of encouraged disobedience of laws, every action threatening public could find a well established excuse. Hence, in our nomocracy society, every individual should seek solving way in the confine permitted by laws, even though there are some rules of laws lacking of consideration.

To sum up, with social circumstance changing continuously, we human beings will face more and more diverse issues which are brought by science, technology or the limitation of human insights of future, consequently, our legal system should keep abreast of the times and build up better-improved laws which according to the wills of maximum majority.

laner023UID: 2223653

Laws, the body of rules and principles governing the affairs of a community and enforced by a political authority.（原句没有谓语。Laws, the body of rules and principles governing the affairs of a community, are enforced by a political authority.） Concerning the laws, the author classifies the laws into two types-just and unjust and claims that people in our society should not only obey the just laws, but also disobey the unjust ones. In my opinion, this view is fundamentally ignoring the significance of law and incontrovertible constancy of legal system.

To begin with, it is discussible to make laws simply categorized into just and unjust ones. As we all know, any kind of laws in one community or one society is a maximum balance of rights between the giving and restricting. The laws give every individual both of the rights and restrictions, (and) there are relative rights and no absolute restrictions. The same law may be different through one individual's eye from another's. Whether a law is just or not is more of a subjective issue that differs according to personal interests, social class and value system(照你下面论述的顺序，是不是应该把这两个换下位置？). Thus it lacks of consideration that categorized the laws in this way.

Let's take euthanasia for example. For the people who believe in a certain religion, laws which empower the dying patients the rights to operate mercy killing are unjust, because they think people don't have the freedom and rights to end their life which were given by gods. Meanwhile for the other people who believe other religions or have no religions, （such）laws are just because people have the rights to choose, they could choose to live and also to die, 这句就有两套主谓宾了。我能读懂你的意思，但是，这么写好像语法有问题。你看把“，”换成“：”好不好 even more, they think euthanasia may be a great mercy for those who are dying. It is difficult for us to judge whether the euthanasia is right or wrong, but it is certain that the local law about euthanasia must be accordant with great majority. Besides the personal value system, the different views of laws may generate due to personal interests. For instance, one law in Vienna prohibits the inhabitants from using air-condition for protecting the environment of this ancient capital. In the eyes of Vienna people, it is just and considerate for the environment, climate and future life, while as for people elsewhere, this law which may cause old people to feel comfortable(uncomfortable) even get sick in summer may be regarded as unjust. Therefore, it should be determined on a case-by-case basis rather than arbitrarily lineated an explicit line between these two kinds of laws.

Besides how to think of the justice of laws（这句话是什么意思？我隐约能理解，但如果翻译出来就觉得有些怪怪的）, there is no deny that every individual should obey the laws, for the laws are based on the interests and wills of majority. Taking the highway code means as an example, it requires people drive on the right side of the road, turn right or left on the very time and act following the traffic light. Only when people obey the rules, there will be a smooth traffic,（.） if not so, there must be a traffic jam, even a threat to people's life. Therefore, the compliance with the laws will not only bring us a harmonious society, but also make people a guarantee of basic living.(这段语句之间的衔接很好)

However, it is truly reasonless to disobey or resist the laws which are unjust through a certain individual's eye. The unjust laws often are the results of unawareness of the legislator or the changing social conditions, consequently, in order to improve and build up a legal system which could keep abreast of the times, what every individual should do is to seek a way to solve like（ ？？by？） taking a large-scale discussion of the very law, catching more and more peoples' attentions, but rather to disobey or resist deliberately. If the resistance to the law is encouraged, people may do something extreme to show his incompliance and defiance, which would result in a disorder out of peoples' original intention. Considering the euthanasia example again, a person who disagree with freedom of euthanasia may oppose, （might）inveigh or even murder the people who are with euthanasia, the euthanasia patient's family, or even the doctors who do the mercy killing. Maybe just because of encouraged disobedience of laws, every action threatening public could find a well established excuse(没懂。). Hence, in our nomocracy society, every individual should seek solving way in the confine permitted by laws, even though there are some rules of laws lacking of consideration.观点承接得不错，有点层层递进的感觉

To sum up, with social circumstance changing continuously, we human beings will face more and more diverse issues which are brought by science, technology or the limitation of human insights of future, consequently, our legal system should keep abreast of the times and build up better-improved laws which according to the wills of maximum majority.

观点很清晰，观点之间的承接不错，逻辑性就出来了
语言方面，我发现作者和我一样喜欢用超长句。ETS虽然提倡适当用用长句，但要注意，句子太长了有时会影响理解噢。