In this memo, the speaker claims that obeying not unjust laws but just laws is everyone’s responsibility. While at first glance the claim sounds paradoxical on its face, the paradox is still explainable and the explanation is well supported empirically. Nevertheless, the claim cannot be supported by some evidences serving to discredit it. Thus the claim seems unsupportive in several respects.
To begin with, without professional law knowledge, it is hard to perceive which law is just or not. Since law deals with diverse provisions, the interpretation between people with different understandings could be various also, inclining to one’s self advantages. For example, the juvenile laws are likely to be less than ordinary ones. Yet as juvenile crimes are getting worse and more cruel, there are voices to amend them to more powerful ones. Meanwhile, some disagrees with the voices since incomplete cognitive abilities attributed to their crime and should give opportunities to amend oneself. Thus, until such disputes are finished, laws should be obeyed no matter what.
However, unjust laws are usually unsupported by people and they are required to be evaluated with more stringent standards. If majority of social members disagrees with the unjustness and speak one voice to revise it, then the legislation headquarters should reconsider its status. People are speaking their own words louder than before just as coming out feminism or homosexuality is more liberated to speak. If there were unjust laws discriminating socially disadvantaged groups from others should be reconsidered for its abomination. If not, our society is not a place warranting freedom to every individuals which sounds anachronistic.
Nevertheless, unjust laws are also laws and as we are one of the members in a certain society, it is our duty to follow them. Even though, it is unsatisfied and feel uneasy to follow such dirty law, it is regarded as a promise that our society decided. Orders are orders and if unconformists keep increase, then our social life could be threatened by social disorders. For example, although increased terror attacks in Europe were found to be originated from ISIS or one of radical refugees from the Middle East, attacking any Islamic people for any reason like revenge doesn’t rationalize its conduct. Indeed, locals can complain about accepting some tolerance to them relative to the significance of crime, seemingly unjust laws are also part of laws so people should endure and participate to stabilize their own society.
In sum, while at first impression disobeying unjust laws seems mutually exclusive, it appears they are not. Thus the speaker’s claim has some merit. Nevertheless, legislation system should monitor every disputable laws for reconsideration and reflect majorities’ opinions. In the final analysis, the correctness of the speaker’s claim should be considered in case-by-case basis.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 347, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...some evidences serving to discredit it. Thus the claim seems unsupportive in several...
^^^^
Line 9, column 109, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...lly exclusive, it appears they are not. Thus the speaker's claim has some merit...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, so, still, then, thus, well, while, for example, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.5258426966 169% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2508.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 457.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48796498906 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62358717085 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12372109919 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564551422319 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 797.4 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.8912600449 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.5 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0416666667 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45833333333 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 5.13820224719 292% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20919846934 0.243740707755 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0657811343976 0.0831039109588 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434036280498 0.0758088955206 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125344940042 0.150359130593 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0335998018122 0.0667264976115 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 100.480337079 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.