Lately, some of my readers think that I've been resorting to ad hominem attacks on NMP Thio. Some think that I am rude. Or disrespectful of a highly regarded person. Or merely trying hard to deconstruct NMP Thio's arguments without backing it up with substantive arguments (ie. NMP Thio is wrong therefore I am right). So without further ado, let's clear this shit up.
I am rude
Yes I am rude :(
Ad hominem attacks on NMP Thio
There is a difference between ad hominem and calling a spade a spade.
An ad hominem has this basic form:
Person A makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person A
Therefore claim X is false
It is different when Person A first points out the flaws and silliness in Person B's argument before calling Person B a twit. At most it may be considered rude.
Lack of respect for authority
It doesn't matter if one has PhD in law. Or became a full professor at 38 years of age. You can be a Nobel prize winner, but once you engage in cow dung thinking/logic, you are fair game for criticism and ridicule. The esteemed Einstein had refused to accept quantum theory despite the accuracy of it just because of "aesthetic" reasons (the non-deterministic nature of it). As a result, he was ostracised by the scientific community late in his career. Remember, you are right only if your logic and evidence is sound and not because of how authoritative you are. .
Not backing up my arguments
As for this point, I do admit that I've only engaged in debunking the lame arguments against repealing S377A. And I do know that just because your opponent is wrong doesn't make you right.
So here's my version of why S377A should be repealed.
This rests mainly on the innocent till proven guilty principle. If the pro377A camp can get S377A to be retained by accusing homosexuals to be a hazard to society and then shift the burden of proof onto them to show they pose no harm to society, think about the kind of precedent we are setting. Perhaps it may be justifiable to do this if the potential for harm is really that great to society. Perhaps it may be justifiable if repealing S377A will lead the end of Singapore. Then again, Denmark has had same-sex unions for almost 20 years. Did their society crumble? A case of Chicken Licken running around shouting "The sky is falling!"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi,
If people said that you are rude, they have not seen rude people yet.
Rude people are ...
Like the guys who said that GST is to help the poor.
Like the guys who said ERP is to allow Singaporeans to own cars.
Like the guys who said annunity is to help you when you are almost dying or dead already.
They are not rude?
I don't think rude would be the word to describe them. I suppose they were doing that for our own good :)
Having said that, i leave you with this quote by C.S. Lewis
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
Post a Comment