issue17 [Jet小组]第八次作业

x6xUID: 2180130

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:557  TIME:40min  DATE:18/02/2007

Nowadays in most developing countries, governments administrater the whole country by laws, which is the symbolic of just and fair. In fact, people still could face unjust laws. In my opinion, we should obey unjust laws as well as just laws, however, we should spare no efforts to make unjust laws just through legal methods. Laws should be treated with in obejective ways.

Before further explanation, I would like to mention the prediction of the analysis followed. Since we are able to judge a law is just or unjust, we must have an judging standard, which will help us to treat with laws more objectively.

To begin with, doubtlessly, everyone should  never find excuses to disobey just laws. Law, a kind of regulation which is accepted by the givernment and all citizens after many complex and prudent periods of judgemnets. It follows that if some ones even don't obey just laws,  they are challenging the givernment and the whole society. In other words, they must be ruining the whole society's benifits, which is doubtlessly wrong. Hence, everybody has a duty to obey just laws.

In addition, we still have responsibilities to obey unjust laws. People may augue that since the laws are free from just, obeying them will cause unfair or even seriously wrong results. However, facing unjust laws, citizens should be patience. Are the laws indeed unjust? Is there any problems with our judging standards about just? Does resisting unjust laws help to solve problems? Criticism does good to us in making objective judgements. For an example, many people assert that the law of college entrance exam is not just, for competitons in some large-population provinces, like Hubei, Henan and Hebei, are rather fierce, while some other provinces, such as Beijing and Shanghai, enjoy a lot of entance qulifacations. The judging standards is obsolute equality. Should students resist the college entrance exam? In fact, that the government distribute large cities comparatively more qualifacations has its own reason - colleges and universities are mostly located in large cities, so citizen in large cities contribute more to the developments of them. Juding from this typical example, we can recognize that so-called unjust laws sometimes are mistaken according to a wrong judging standards. We should re-check the standards and bear to obey the so-called unjust laws first, rather than risist without further consideration.

What's more, facing unjust laws, what we should do further is to fight them through legal and just methods. Bearing to accept unjust laws is just a makeshift, instead of the final decision. Chasing reality calls us to seek just and fair, so eventually we will still be back to the main road - fighting unjust laws with legal means. To illustrate, I want to take Martin Luthrt King as an example. Fully recognizing that laws treat black poeple unfairly, King called on the whole world of blackmen to resist those  wrong laws through speech, a legal way. At last, they won their legitimate rights. The similar things happened when we consider Gandi, who lead Indians fight unjust regulations and laws executed by British. The fighting methods he advocates is called non-violence but non-cooperation, another legal and reasonable way.

In sum, everyone should  never find excuses to disobey unjust laws as well as just laws; at the same time, fighting real unjust laws is also necessary.  

mix99UID: 2432326

Nowadays in most developing(建议democratic)countries, governments administrater the whole country by laws, which is the symbolic of just and fair.(这句话总觉的有点不对劲) In fact, people still could face unjust laws(sometimes ).In my opinion, we should obey unjust laws as well as just laws, however没有转折关系we should spare no efforts to make unjust laws just through legal methods. Laws should be treated with in obejective ways.(manner怎么样?)

Before further explanation, I would like to mention the prediction of the analysis followed. Since we are able to judge a law is just or unjust, we must have an judging standard, 因果关系有点混乱which will help us to treat with laws more objectively.

To begin with, doubtlessly, everyone should  never find excuses to disobey just laws. Law, a kind of regulation which is accepted by the givernment and all citizens after many complex and prudent(谨慎用词不当) periods of judgemnets.(这句话建议重写) It follows that if some ones even don't obey just laws,  they are challenging the givernment(罚抄 and the whole society. (挑战政府是可以的)In other words, they must be ruining the whole society's benifits, which is doubtlessly wrong. Hence, everybody has a duty to obey just laws.

In addition, we still have responsibilities to obey unjust laws. People may augue that since(这个好像不合适) the laws are free from just, obeying them will cause unfair or even seriously wrong results. However, facing unjust laws, citizens should be patience. Are the laws indeed unjust? Is there any problems with our judging standards about just? Does resisting unjust laws help to solve problems? Criticism does good to us in making objective judgements(提问与这句话的关系???)For an example, many people assert that the law of college entrance exam(美国人懂吗?)
is not just, for competitons in some large-population provinces, like Hubei, Henan and Hebei, are rather fierce, while some other provinces, such as Beijing and Shanghai, enjoy a lot of entance qulifacations. The judging standards is obsolute equality. Should students resist the college entrance exam? In fact, that the government distribute large cities comparatively more qualifacations has its own reason - colleges and universities are mostly located in large cities, so citizen in large cities contribute more to the developments of them. Juding from this typical example, we can recognize that so-called unjust laws sometimes are mistaken according to a wrong judging standards. We should re-check the standards and bear to obey the so-called unjust laws first, rather than risist without further consideration. (怎么说明结论?扯了半天还是在标准上打转)

What's more, facing unjust laws, what we should do further is to fight them through legal and just methods. Bearing to accept unjust laws is just a makeshift, instead of the final decision. Chasing reality calls us to seek just and fair, so eventually we will still be back to the main road - fighting unjust laws with legal means. To illustrate, I want to take Martin Luthrt King as an example. Fully recognizing that laws treat black poeple unfairly, King called on the whole world of blackmen to resist those  wrong laws through speech, a legal way. At last, they won their legitimate rights. The similar things happened when we consider Gandi, who lead Indians fight unjust regulations and laws executed by British. The fighting methods he advocates is called non-violence but non-cooperation, another legal and reasonable way.论证不清楚,建议重写这一段

In sum, everyone should  never find excuses to disobey unjust laws as well as just laws; at the same time, fighting real unjust laws is also necessary.  
建议不要限制时间,可以先写提纲.想清楚论点和理由再写.改的不好,请多包涵.

[ 本帖最后由 mix99 于 2008-2-19 23:53 编辑 ]