Issue 17【~4而后生~小组】第5次作业, inside 求拍！

insideUID: 2303230

"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."

I strongly agree with the speaker that every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.

Surely, while the law is a matter of public rules, justice is an intensely personal matter. What one person regards as just may strike another as an unwarranted imposition. However, judging a law just or unjust, should depend on whether it will accord with the great social conscience, rather than whether it will meet our personal pretty interests. On this ground, the individual has not only the right but also the obligation to disobey and resist the unjust law by all non-violent means within his reach.

For example, when there were still lots of items to support slavery in the laws two centuries ago, should the slaves be silent to surrender the oppression? And when there are a mass of unfair rules upon the women several decades ago, should the women be soundless to abide the discrimination? If so, there will not be Abolition Movement or Women’s Rights today. Also, Henry David Thoreau, the writer of Civil Disobedience, which has a significant impact on both M. L. King and M. K. Gandhi, refused to pay taxes to finance the government that supported slavery and waged war with Mexico. He emphasized the conscientious breaking an unjust law when it “requires you to be the agent of injustice” by arguing that “Under a government which imprisons unjustly, the true place for a just man is... a prison.”

There are two misapprehensions when thinking of the civil disobedience. One is to believe that resistance to an unjust law means resistance to the State. It is probably completely contrary to the fact that it could actually protect the people’s rights and improve the whole nation. The other is to assure that since the laws are presented by the government, encouraging disobedience to them will lead to anarchy. Anarchy, maybe, but here, it should be pointed out that this word is not equal to disorder, but a situation of order and a society replete with etiquette. In other words, those who think only for themselves and behave according to their unprincipled standards, are more like the anti-anarchists.

To sum up, just as M. L. King has argued in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, “one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” In reality, Both the compliance and insubordination express the respect to the law.

这篇我以前写过。。。呵呵。。。

hezhifei2008UID: 2233976

”In other words, those who think only for themselves and behave according to their unprincipled standards, are more like the anti-anarchists.“ 这句放在这合适吗？没觉得和前面有什必然的因果联系。           倒数第二段你攻击了两个你针对题目成立的假设前提， 老师们是这样教的，但我不记得在哪看过说，尽量不要攻击自己假设的前提，我觉得有点道理，你觉得呢，探讨一下。

napUID: 196976

Surely, while the law is a matter of public rules, justice is an intensely personal matter. What one person regards as just may strike another as an unwarranted imposition. However, judging a law just or unjust, should depend on whether it will accord with the great social conscience, rather than whether it will meet our personal pretty interests. On this ground, the individual has not only the right but also the obligation to disobey and resist the unjust law by all non-violent(感觉non-violent在前面没有展开说明，很突然) means within his reach.

感觉除了楼上的以外没发现什么大问题
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=632454