這不是極端的政策

　　Not This Extreme Policy

　　Now there is a discussion over whether it is right to adopt the policy to allow people who have received high education, especially those who got their degrees abroad to have more than one child while others can＇t. Considering it brutality, I don＇t agree to such an inhumane policy.

　　According to eugenics, this policy may benefit us in short term. We have to confess the importance of family education.Being the first ones to enlighten their children, parents actually play the role of a life-long teacher to their children, too, having great influence on them. Well-educated parents may probably do better in bringing up children and help them develop better both mentally and physically.  Thus, this policy maybe, to some extent, contributes to the development of our nation.

　　However, extremely unfair as this policy is, it will undoubtedly do more harm than its would-be advantages. Progeniture is our basic human right, and family planning is the policy we adopted together to stop the overgrowth of people. It is seen as discrimination towards those who are ordinarily educated to allow people with high diploma to bear more children only. This policy runs counter to "freedom, equality and fraternal love" as we＇ve long claimed. It might even cause serious political problem.

　　What＇s more, in my point of view, a good diploma is not necessarily equal to knowledge.  Yet, knowledge doesn＇t mean everything. We should not only judge a person merely by his education level, but by his abilities and skills and health and morality and personality as well. Furthermore, one＇s education level is not only influenced by his gene but by the financial circumstances, the culture of their families, the surroundings and many other factors.  Ordinary people may have their own greatness.

　　Einstein＇s parents hadn＇t been to any college. If we had forbidden them to have this child, what would the world be? Knowledge doesn＇t easily mean superiority.

　　So radical a policy will not do good to our society. Actually,as far as I am concerned, putting more money to education is far more practical, which will help to form a good atmosphere for education and knowledge, thus lifting up the level of our whole nation. Only this is a long-term solution.

　　簡  評(píng)

　　人口問題一直是一個(gè)敏感的話題。已經(jīng)執(zhí)行了二十多年的計(jì)劃生育可以向這些高學(xué)歷、洋博士們開綠燈嗎?高云霞同學(xué)一針見血地指出了這一政策的不合理性。

　　習(xí)作結(jié)構(gòu)緊湊，節(jié)奏感強(qiáng)，段落之間有緊密的邏輯關(guān)系。如第二段看似講這一政策的合理性，而且似已經(jīng)推出了一個(gè)合理結(jié)論，但突然第三段開始筆峰一轉(zhuǎn)，態(tài)度堅(jiān)決地闡明了自己的立場(chǎng)，“It is seen as discrimination towards those who are ordinarily educated tO allow people with high diploma to bear morechildren only.This policy runs counter to·Freedom，equality and fraternal love＇as we＇ve long claimed.”又如，第四段先以三個(gè)否定句作鋪墊，引出了“Ordinary people may have their own greatness.”的結(jié)論，并且追加了Einstein的例子，恰當(dāng)、準(zhǔn)確、有說服力。

　　高云霞同學(xué)的語言流暢，表達(dá)準(zhǔn)確。值得一提的是，她在兩次闡述立場(chǎng)時(shí)，都采用了倒裝的表達(dá)方式，如：“However，extremely unfair as this policy is，“will undoubtedlydO more harmthan ts would—be advantages.”又如：“So radical a policy will not do good toour society.”倒裝句的使用，吸引了讀者的注意力，突出了她的立場(chǎng)觀點(diǎn)。這也是論說文中常用的表達(dá)技巧之一。

　　(點(diǎn)評(píng)教師：盧愛華)