【学号】I15煎鸡蛋
【前言】
★ 常言道：“温故而知新”。那么趁写作计划进行到一半时候，开始对之前写的东西进行“翻新”吧！
【文章】
Whether better-off celebrities should be coerced to donate their money? The deadly explosion sparked an online debate on philanthropical philanthropic and moral issues of the rich. With an avalanche of netizens whipping up celebrities donate as big enormous amount to help victims in calamities, it is justified to question the essence behind philanthropy. Public donations, made by beloved celebrities in particular, render their fans often tend to donate. While some claims we shouldn't take the conduct of the donations of the celebrities for granted,since there is no exact law or for that.
As far as I am concerned, donation is and should be a voluntary act. No one can effortlessly earn a huge amount of money in society, so it is never easy to stick on his objection, toil and travail maybe. We shouldn't should not blame it on them because celebrities can spend whatever they want and we are not bestowed with rights to stop them from purchasing and lavishing. Furthermore, although celebrities whose money not donated to refugees, it doesn't mean does not mean that they are violating the law. On the contrary, those gougers squealing on the internet seriously act against the Welfare Donation Law, which says “donations should be made on a voluntary and non-reimbursable basis.” and “any false apportioned any covert act of apportion is prohibited.”
To summarize, charity is not a matter of billionaires or trillionaires but rather performed by every single individual.
【范文】
Donation shouldn't Be Compulsory
Whether celebrities should be coerced into philanthropy has been dogged all the way by controversy. Supporters think celebrity ties help awaken the public awareness in this aspect with their outstanding influence. Besides, such noble actions should be promoted as a way to set elebrities' ethical profile and a timely way to reward the society. Yet, supported by the donation law, opponents argue that donation should be a voluntary act however affluent celebrities are and however noble the cause is.
In the event of natural disasters or a public meltdown, there is always a huge hullabaloo about prodding celebrities into donating large sums of money. As witnesses to the luxury cars and helicopters, designer clothes and beach houses, some people urge the affluent to give out more money to help the needed. This seems justified. On second thoughts however,this is nothing but a moral abduction. In my view, donation should be a voluntary act for two reasons. Firstly, cynical as this may sound. anecdotal evidence shows that the so-called star power does not necessarily make the cause more recognizable nor raise the chance ofpublic involvement in philanthropy. As often as not. the inevitably promotional opportunities accompanying these generous acts, if mishandled. may turn people off charitable giving. Secondly, the mandatory diktat of donation will certainly trigger off celebrities' repulsion and push them to the opposite direction. Though at the leeward side of fortune, celebrities have legally earned their lustrous living. They have the very reason to donate or not, which shouldn't serve as the criterion for judging their ethics. Nor should they feel the senseless squeeze of forced apportion.
Maybe in times of a lackluster market for the noble philanthropic causes, rather than pay lip service to this cause or remain a mere cheerleader to others' corresponding acts, we should, first and foremost take our own responsibility in reaching out our hands to those needed even if our hands are a bit small and shaky. From a simple act of feeding a stray dog to donating a generous sum of money to the socially disadvantaged creatures, all these have the same merit in essence.
【范文精析】
Whether celebrities should be coerced into philanthropy has been dogged all the way by controversy. Supporters think celebrity ties help awaken the public awareness in this aspect with their outstanding influence. Besides, such noble actions should be promoted as a way to set elebrities' ethical profile and a timely way to reward the society. Yet, supported by the donation law, opponents argue that donation should be a voluntary act however affluent celebrities are and however noble the cause is.
【行文分析】
"开头部分首先开门见山点明话题,即是否应该强迫名人捐款,然后概括选段中正反双方的观点。"
In the event of natural disasters or a public meltdown, there is always a huge hullabaloo about prodding celebrities into donating large sums of money. As witnesses to the luxury cars and helicopters, designer clothes and beach houses, some people urge the affluent to give out more money to help the needed. This seems justified. On second thoughts however,this is nothing but a moral abduction. In my view, donation should be a voluntary act for two reasons. Firstly, cynical as this may sound. anecdotal evidence shows that the so-called star power does not necessarily make the cause more recognizable nor raise the chance ofpublic involvement in philanthropy. As often as not. the inevitably promotional opportunities accompanying these generous acts, if mishandled. may turn people off charitable giving. Secondly, the mandatory diktat of donation will certainly trigger off celebrities' repulsion and push them to the opposite direction. Though at the leeward side of fortune, celebrities have legally earned their lustrous living. They have the very reason to donate or not, which shouldn't serve as the criterion for judging their ethics. Nor should they feel the senseless squeeze of forced apportion.
【行文分析】
"中间部分首先描述一旦发生灾难或人为事故,催促名人捐款的呼声就会甚嚣尘上,这看起来貌似合理,实则为道德绑架。接下来,从两个方面论证了强迫名人做慈善的不合理性。一方面,明星效应并不一定能增加某个慈善活动的认同度,同时也不能增加公众对某个项目的捐赠;另一方面,强制性捐款极有可能引起名人的不悦,把他们推到相反的方向。"
Maybe in times of a lackluster market for the noble philanthropic causes, rather than pay lip service to this cause or remain a mere cheerleader to others' corresponding acts, we should, first and foremost take our own responsibility in reaching out our hands to those needed even if our hands are a bit small and shaky. From a simple act of feeding a stray dog to donating a generous sum of money to the socially disadvantaged creatures, all these have the same merit in essence.
