issue17【7\8\910】第十四次作业，法律的很多啊！

1001storyUID: 2516918

TOPIC: 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."

Could an individual in a society only abide by just laws and even is reluctant to obey unjust laws? In order to response to this complex issue, in my point of view, we need to analyse the just and the unjust of laws in the first place from a dialectic perspective.  

The just of laws in the legal field is classified in to two different kinds: juristic just and objective just which is not available. As the tremendous differences among every individual, it is not practical and possible for each to judge the justice of laws depending on the recognitions of themselves. For example, the Euthanasia is considered as a absolute respect of the will of patients and a best reduction of pains suffered by them, while some people argue that the Euthanasia is an indirect manner to deprive of the right for patients to survive. And allowing the existence of the homosexuality in our society respects the will of homosexuals in some individuals' viewpoints, while many citizens regard this love as a destruction of the moral and ethic standard in our social mainstream. People of the society bring about the individual points of morals and ethics to the judgment of justice in laws, resulting in the subject opinion, mysterious and difficultly analysing, instilling into the legal objection.

In order to bring stability and order to the group of people that the laws are enforced upon, it demands that the citizens must submit to the rules cited in the enaction without the requirement to ensure the authority of laws. If people can decide the concrete laws to obey or disobey by themselves like the solider can choice the command which they want to execute in a war, the laws will be least use at all and totally lost the severity of them.Sometimes, for legal system to work for the society, the law should be abided by the people and fairly implemented among the population at best.

Finally, the laws are not ossified and unchangeable with the development of a society, and there is no perpetual law in the world. Although the rules of laws should be fixed and seldom changed, the eminent flaws or some out-date laws could be deposed and modified by the legal institutions. Only by applying the flexibility in different places and times into rules can the justice of laws be comprehensively granted.

From the analysis made above, I strongly commit to the notion that we need to respect the dignity of laws and completely obey the rules of enactions. In a word, we should never disobey the contemporary laws without any sever deficiency in them and especially with the reason of "unjust" in ones’ own mind.
   
倒数第二段，真没想到例子，如果有好的请指教:loveliness:

tsayUID: 2492916

Could anindividual in a society only abide by just laws and even is reluctantto obey unjust laws? In order to response to this complex issue, in mypoint of view, we need to analyse the just and the unjust of laws inthe first place from a dialectic perspective.  

The justof laws in the legal field is classified in to two different kinds:juristic just and objective just which is not available. As thetremendous differences among every individual, it is not practical andpossible for each to judge the justice of laws depending on therecognitions of themselves. For example, the Euthanasia is consideredas a absolute respect of the will of patients and a best reduction ofpains suffered by them, while some people argue that the Euthanasia isan indirect manner to deprive of the right for patients to survive. Andallowing the existence of the homosexuality in our society respects thewill of homosexuals in some individuals' viewpoints, while manycitizens regard this love as a destruction of the moral and ethicstandard in our social mainstream. People of the society bring aboutthe individual points of morals and ethics to the judgment of justicein laws, resulting in the subject opinion, mysterious and difficultlyanalysing, instilling into the legal objection.

In orderto bring stability and order to the group of people that the laws areenforced upon, it demands that the citizens must submit to the rulescited in the enaction without the requirement to ensure the authorityof laws(这句话不懂). If people can decide（读不通 是想表达什么？？） the concrete laws to obey or disobey bythemselves like the solider can choice(选择的名词 或者上乘的 形容词 你说想说选择吗 那是 choose) the command which they want toexecute in a war, the laws will be least use（useful???） at all and totally lostthe severity of them.Sometimes, forlegal system to work for the society, the law should be abided by thepeople and fairly implemented among the population at best. 没怎么读懂 单词错误 还有表达不清楚

Finally, the laws are not ossified（露骨？？表面化？？） and unchangeablewith the development of a society, and there is no perpetual （PERMANENT ???）law in theworld. Although the rules of laws should be fixed and seldom changed(不通),the eminent flaws or some out-date laws could be deposed and modified by the legal institutions. Only by applying the flexibility in different places and times into rules can the justice of laws be comprehensively granted. 也没怎么读通

From theanalysis made above, I strongly commit to the notion that we need torespect the dignity of laws and completely obey the rules of enactions.In a word, we should never disobey the contemporary laws without anysever deficiency in them and especially with the reason of "unjust" inones’ own mind.

1 第一段写的很不错  
2不过单词感觉用的不准 还有语句 我不知道你要表达什么 也无法帮改
3 后面的两段感觉很长促 楼主限时的吗？？


[ 本帖最后由 tsay 于 2008-8-4 23:43 编辑 ]