issue17【天下无G】bingbingximin求各位帮忙看看～留链必回拍～～～

bingbingxieminUID: 2283852

请大家帮忙看看，狠拍啊～～留链待我回拍～～嘿嘿～～
谢谢～
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."
Words:611         Time: 1h           Date:2007-01-21

In the modern society, almost every citizen is familiar with the noun: Laws. All the rules and regulations that require and prohibit a certain action are known as laws. The statement divides the laws into two categories namely just and unjust, and the speaker encourages us to disobey the so-called unjust ones while obeying the just ones. It seems reasonable to some extents but when weighing in mind carefully one may find it is actually problematic.

Admittedly, human being is endowed with the capacity to measure the authenticity as a substance and the right to advocate the right things as well as deny the wrong ones. The laws are no exception thus everyone has the right to struggle with the unjust and ridiculous ones to protect their own profits. If not, the laws may make no sense because the most important principle of the laws---equality, might have been broken. Martin Luther King Junior led the struggle towards the unjust laws in the US, which unequally treating the Africa-American citizens, and thanks to his disobedience those pitiful citizens can be benefited by the laws nowadays.

In addition, seeing from the aspect of the initial origin and process the development of most existence, including the laws, we may realize that nothing can improve itself without modification. If we just practice obediently to obey the present laws, never question the justice of it, where the development and improvement in this field comes. The reason why the Chapter and other regulations in a certain nation need to be modified is that the citizens and administers recognize the unjust points in the current laws and they pointed them out. Besides, the society is progressing in such an unbelievable tempo, thus the laws themselves  may turn to be incompatible with the changing appearance of the world, so it may sincerely calls for the resistant opposition to make the laws better.

However, when emphasizing the merits to challenge the unjust laws we should not be so single-minded to overlook several problems. For one thing, to be frank, there is no exact standard criterion to measure the justice of the laws, that is, the criterion vary from one individual to another. For instance, the controversy towards homosexuality has lasted for quite a long time--- whether the laws should protect those homosexual person or not remains a perplex problem. The advocates allege it unjust to ignore the right of the homosexual persons while the opposites claim that homosexuality as an immoral or abnormal phenomenon should not be protected. For this point of view, it is really hard for us to establish a measure to assess the justice of the laws.

For another thing, each citizen may seek for different interests to benefit his own and if each of them resists the laws that are unjust in his mind, the society may turn to be in a chaos and the laws function little. Since the laws came into being for the purpose of making the society peaceful and the majorities' rights and needs are placed on the top. To satisfy the desires of each citizen is really idealism. You may image that if we modify the laws to make it in accordance with the wills of a robber and make the action of robbery to be legitimate, how terrible the world would be.

To sum up, the speaker's statement is reasonable in some cases but when meditating from the other side the reality we may find it be too arbitrary. To make the laws function well and the society runs in a certain order, we should take into several aspects account when we are confronted with the challenge to the laws.

yan-dorisUID: 2261928

文章能在1h内完成，很不错了，继续加油！
感觉整体思路有，但逻辑性不强，需要整理！

In the modern society, almost every citizen is familiar with the noun: Laws. All the rules and regulations that require and prohibit a certain action are known as laws. The statement divides the laws into two categories namely just and unjust, and the speaker encourages us to disobey the so-called unjust ones while obeying the just ones. It seems reasonable to some extents but when weighing in mind carefully one may find it is actually problematic.[有点argu,包括结尾]

Admittedly, human being is endowed with the capacity to measure the authenticity as a substance and the right to advocate the right things as well as deny the wrong ones. [开头的感觉是你要讲problematic 的原因，咱一看观点就完全和前面不一样！]The laws are no exception thus everyone has the right to struggle with the unjust and ridiculous ones to protect their own profits. If not, the laws may make no sense because the most important principle of the laws---equality, might have been broken. Martin Luther King Junior led the struggle towards the unjust laws in the US, which unequally treating the Africa-American citizens, and thanks to his disobedience those pitiful citizens can be benefited by the laws nowadays.

In addition, seeing from the aspect of the initial origin and process the development of most existence, including the laws, we may realize that nothing can improve itself without modification. [只是换了个说法，道理还是跟上面一样，其实你也是说明反对错的，支持正确的，对吧？]If we just practice obediently to obey the present laws, never question the justice of it, where the development and improvement in this field comes. The reason why the Chapter and other regulations in a certain nation need to be modified is that the citizens and administers recognize the unjust points in the current laws and they pointed them out. Besides, the society is progressing in such an unbelievable tempo, thus the laws themselves  may turn to be incompatible with the changing appearance of the world, so it may sincerely calls for the resistant opposition to make the laws better.

However, when emphasizing the merits to challenge the unjust laws we should not be so single-minded to overlook several problems. [对于just and unjust laws 很难定义我觉得放一开始更好]For one thing, to be frank, there is no exact standard criterion to measure the justice of the laws, that is, the criterion vary from one individual to another. For instance, the controversy towards homosexuality has lasted for quite a long time--- whether the laws should protect those homosexual person or not remains a perplex problem. The advocates allege it unjust to ignore the right of the homosexual persons while the opposites claim that homosexuality as an immoral or abnormal phenomenon should not be protected. For this point of view, it is really hard for us to establish a measure to assess the justice of the laws.

For another thing[前面没有for one thing], each citizen may seek for different interests to benefit his own and if each of them resists the laws that are unjust in his mind, the society may turn to be in a chaos and the laws function little.[这个可以作为一个论点，但你只做了个补充] Since the laws came into being for the purpose of making the society peaceful and the majorities' rights and needs are placed on the top. To satisfy the desires of each citizen is really idealism. You may image that if we modify the laws to make it in accordance with the wills of a robber and make the action of robbery to be legitimate, how terrible the world would be.

To sum up, the speaker's statement is reasonable in some cases but when meditating from the other side the reality we may find it be too arbitrary. To make the laws function well and the society runs in a certain order, we should take into several aspects account when we are confronted with the challenge to the laws.

bingbingxieminUID: 2283852

nodnod～谢谢doris～hoho～～:loveliness:
我就是思路和逻辑恨不清晰呢，汗自己一个。。。一定努力嘿嘿～