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.

The speaker of the issue divides laws in 2 separate kinds. By stating the above, the speaker is questioning the righteousness of laws. Does that mean all the laws formed by government and imposed on citizens are not justified for what they mean? I understand that the law here implies those imposed as social laws for example payment of taxes and police-enforced laws against crime. Anything outside the scope of a governing body can not be stated as a law.


First of all, law is enforced by a governing body, those who are elected representatives of the people and were chosen to work for the betterment of our society. Therefore, each law, before it was passed went through series of discussions to justify its validity. For example, most of the states enforce seat-buckle up law which may appear inconvenient but is definitely not unjustified. The safety of the drivers was the foremost concern before this was put into effect. It is not possible for government to enforce unjust laws. They are answerable to their citizens and work as a congress. Any unjust law would only lead to jeopardizing their stability.


Furthermore, laws are for the benefit of the people. They are in place to maintain order, a mode of operation, discipline and a convenient procedure to execute day to day tasks. The primary goal for enforcing a procedure as law is to make it mandatory for people to abide by it. If any law is disobeyed, it is perhaps a crime and may lead to punishment. There is a well established notion that for most of the civilians it is the fear...