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."
WORDS: 528 TIME: 01:00:00 DATE: 2011-4-11 23:09:15
Does every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and resist unjust laws, as the statement suggests? Admittedly, many people hold the view that there are some unjust laws in our society and there is no reason to obey them. However, I fundamentally disagree with the statement because it is unwarranted to suggest people to disobey and resist unjust laws. Therefore, my contention toward this opinion is that it is necessary for us to obey all the laws while it does not mean the law can't be changed better.
First of all, to discuss the evaluation standard of laws, we have to trace back to law's merit. Common sense tells us that the purpose for human to create laws lies in the needs of regulating individual activities and thereby harmonizing society. In other words, whether a law is valuable depends on the benefits it brings to society, especially on a holistic while level, instead of vague conceptions of justness or unjustness. Because different people stand in different positions, which make their attitudes and perspective significantly different, there is no law absolutely just to everyone. An article of law may seem just to a certain group of people but it is thought as unjust laws to those who do not belong to the group. Thus, the criteria of justness cannot assess value of a law. Otherwise, the whole legislation system would lose its authority.
Just because it is the laws, people should obey them without any exception. It is similar to the field of army. What the soldiers should do is to follow the orders. We can image that if the soldiers in the battlefield only obey the orders which they consider right and refuse to follow the orders which they consider wrong, the army must be very weak and easy to be conquered. And it is the same with laws. If the laws cannot be executed commendably because some people obey them and some people not, the legal system will have no meaning at all because it loses indispensable dignity.
However, in reality, the law is adaptable and flexible in certain situations, places and times. Some would ask that, do we have no options besides abidance even if that law is undoubted absurd？Of course not! I concede that with the fast development of society, old laws might be rendered inappropriate or even useless in some field. After all, written world which cannot change and keep up with the developing world. However, inobservance is not an apt solution, if it could be call a solution, to solve this problem. We should keep in mind that laws are created to be obeyed. The correct solution is to amend laws, within the frame of constitution. As a typical example, the first Constitution was born in 1791.Until now, there have 27 amendments, much more words than the initial Constitution.
From analysis made above, I concede that it is necessary for us to obey all the laws while it does not mean the law can't be change better. We should fight for the authority of laws and a more just law at the same time.