View Full Version : I am going to take GRE at 18th. Help score this one

06-16-2011, 03:17 AM
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 want to evalue my level. Please help.Thanks in advance.

The speaker expressed his idea of distinguishing the laws to two parts: just and unjust, one of which should be respected and obeyed by all of us. And more importantly, the other one that is not fair should not be obeyed by us; and we should all rise up and start to against the unjust laws. I tally with the speaker's point of view in some parts; however, I cannot agree with his another part of the statements.

The speaker defined the laws into two opposite parts, fair and unfair, which I cannot agree with. As we know, the laws are legislated by parliament that selected by all people around the country who have the votes. So the parliament represents the dominant class of the society, then the laws made by the legislative body can represent the rights of the predominant class and protect these rights from being intruded. There are still other classes that represent other force of the society which are in the minor position, whose profits are against the rolling class, would be limited by the laws made by the preeminent class. So the laws are quite fair to the rolling class and unfair to the week class. In my opinion, laws are not just absolute but a relative idea that determined by the positions of people they stand in. It is really arbitrary and pompous to say what is just and what is not.

I agree with the point the speaker caught up with that every society member should obey the roles make by parliament. It is obvious a duty for citizens to obey the laws in a country, which is the precondition of every rights you would gain in the name of the law. We are told to be a follower of laws when we are still young in the primary school, which have plant a seed of obedience to the laws or we should get punishment as the result of breaking the law.

Another idea I cannot agree with is that the speaker believed that we should not obey to these laws that seemed obviously unjust to us. I opine that we should obey any laws made by legislation because the constitutional law ask us to do so, which is the promise of having other rights. Most significantly, we would get penalty if we break the laws even they are unfair to us, which would made us suffer and lose other rights that some laws that are just assigned to us.

Even though we should follow these laws that unfair to us, I do not mean that we should bear these unjust for the rest of our lives, which as the speaker's opinion, we should rise up to protest them. All people around the world know the well-known black people right fighter, Dr. Martin King, known for his famous speech: I have a dream, who against the unfair treatment in the America for over twenty years, fighting for freedom and parity for the African descendant. He clearly knew that such unfair that not allow black and white people sitting in the same place in the bus was so ridiculous, however, he just fellow these preposterous roles and protested for the black in legal ways such as holding the gathering in the name of the police. Even though his final achievement brought a lot of fame, his gentle and legal behaviors was the most important way why people today still show great respect to him. If he protested the government in a radical way instead of what he had already done, people would regard him as a terrorist rather than civil rights fighter.

Based on the analysis I made above, I agree some part of statement, however some pasts should be corrected such as people should obey these unjust laws and protest in a reasonable way.