Oh there once was a pirate pegleg,
and this swab loved to drink from his keg;
well he smelled like a whale
and he drank lots of ale,
then he gave his wood leg the name greg....
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Monday, May 07, 2007
Rules were made to be kept (Prompt #4)
Rules keep a society functioning smoothly. Yet a familiar adage states, "Rules were made to be broken." Some, like the late Martin Luther King, Jr., have applied this addage to laws: "An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust...is in reality expressingthe highest respect for the law.
What is your opinion of the claim that breaking the rules is sometimes necessary? In an essay, support your position by discussing an example (or examples) from literature, the arts, science and technology, history, current events, or your own experience or observation.
There is a common expression that says "Rules were made to be broken." But if that's true, what's the point of having the rules? If rules are set in place and ignored, how does that help anyone?
Rules were created for the benefit of the people and for the stability of the kingdom. They establish a concrete foundation of what is wrong (not allowed) and what is right (allowed) in a certain area. This brings up a question, can morality change with the terrain? The answer is no. Morality is the same all over the planet, but the perception and protection of morality differs.
Rules do all these things, most of the time. The effectiveness of the rule or law is based on how many people actually pay attention to it. A country could have the greatest laws ever and it wouldn't help at all if no-one obeyed them.
Laws should be broken, but only in certain conditions, etc. In the Bible, David and his men ate the holy bread from the temple because they were starving. It was against the law to do this, but it is clear that God approved.
In conclusion, yes, it is necessary to break some laws, but only in dire need, when the law is foolish, or when it goes against your religious convictions. Rules were made to be kept.
Stupid time restraint.
What is your opinion of the claim that breaking the rules is sometimes necessary? In an essay, support your position by discussing an example (or examples) from literature, the arts, science and technology, history, current events, or your own experience or observation.
There is a common expression that says "Rules were made to be broken." But if that's true, what's the point of having the rules? If rules are set in place and ignored, how does that help anyone?
Rules were created for the benefit of the people and for the stability of the kingdom. They establish a concrete foundation of what is wrong (not allowed) and what is right (allowed) in a certain area. This brings up a question, can morality change with the terrain? The answer is no. Morality is the same all over the planet, but the perception and protection of morality differs.
Rules do all these things, most of the time. The effectiveness of the rule or law is based on how many people actually pay attention to it. A country could have the greatest laws ever and it wouldn't help at all if no-one obeyed them.
Laws should be broken, but only in certain conditions, etc. In the Bible, David and his men ate the holy bread from the temple because they were starving. It was against the law to do this, but it is clear that God approved.
In conclusion, yes, it is necessary to break some laws, but only in dire need, when the law is foolish, or when it goes against your religious convictions. Rules were made to be kept.
Stupid time restraint.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
