- UID
- 729208
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-2-28
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
65. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Is it reasonable for us to be committed to just law while to disobey unjust laws? The speaker claims so, for the reason that human who design the law is far from perfect could err, rendering the laws flaw. I agree insofar as that there indeed exist some unfair laws. At the same time, however, whether the law is just or not fails to be the criterion to decide if it should be inviolate.
Initially, some people might challenge that laws based on racial discrimination should be resisted, for it betrays the famous notion that every born to be equal. Slavery in the United States before the American Revolutionis a case in point, which deprives the Black from proper rights to be educated, to be respected and to gain rational salaries. However, even if the law is flawed, the amendment job belongs to those federal regulators to correct it instead of every individual in a society. In fact, if a law is dubious, these government officials may notice much earlier than the ordinary due to their systematic knowledge of laws and clairvoyance of the laws. The correct attitude toward the flaws of established laws is to reflect them to the legislators through proper way. Only in this mild way could social regulations be improved appropriately and we maintain our right to the most and without imprudence.
Other people, moreover, are likely to argue that human beings are born with nature to berate unjust behavior no matter it is a law or a moral issue. To be specific, historically when people were suffering disaster-like foreign invasion or colonial government, there must be an outstanding figure to offer them faith and lead to fight for freedom, such as Joan of Arc, Gandhi. People who believe that opinion, nevertheless, overlook the key essence to support it-the definition of just. Justness is a concept with relativity that different individuals may view the same law with opposite opinions, owing to their religion, statue, etc. which means that whether a law is justice cannot be precisely judged by the ordinary individuals in the society.
Ultimately, and perhaps the most importantly, it might be challenged that obeying an unjust law will generate the turmoil in the society. An apt example involves the history that Hitler established several tyrannical laws in the World War Two, under the practice of which quantities of Jews are killed. However, crucial government legislations do by no means indicate all flawed laws. Since laws have become the cherished and established rules in our society, running against them is more likely to cause tragic. Regard everyone as a tree in the garden, then the laws is like the gardener who pollard redundant leaves and twigs in order to restrict these trees’ growth in a certain way, thus helping them grow healthily and properly. As a result, if any action of disobeying so-called unjust laws from his or her perspective, the whole society would undoubtedly come into chaos. For these matters, in order to maintain social order, we ought to obey some laws which we regard as unjust in our own aspect.
To sum up, no matter whether laws are just or not, violating them will to some extent cause more problems. The optimal approach is to reflect the flaws in laws to the federal governors rather than disobey them directly.
这个instruction第一次写，不太会，就怕跑题，下周就考试了，求拍 |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-5-18 21:34:56
收藏
收藏
