mollymeek (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} mollymeek) wrote,@ 2007-10-23 16:28:00 |
|
There's really no need to critique certain arguments that have already been critiqued. So today Molly shall give out awards instead.
1. Best Equivocation Award
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Erasing the difference between the being "conservative" and a desire for "conservation" (e.g. environmental conservation). I see, many environmentalists are conservatives?
Quote: "Like many, I applaud the government’s wisdom in keeping 377A which conserves what upholds the national interest. ‘Conservative’ here is not a dirty word connoting backwardness; environmental conservation protects our habitat; the moral ecology must be conserved to protect what is precious and sustains a dynamic, free and good society."
2. Best Black Pot Award
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Calling the kettle black. Talking about the "fallacies" committed by gay activists
Quotes: "These flawed arguments [for repealing 377A] are marinated with distracting fallacies . . ."
3. Best 'Because I say so' Award
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: For saying that the arguments to retain 377A are convincing and that arguments to repeal it are empty. Good Try.
Quotes: (1) Sir, the arguments to retain 377A are overwhelmingly compelling and should be fully articulated, to enable legislators to make informed decisions and not be bewitched by the empty rhetoric and emotional sloganeering employed by many radical liberals, which generate more heat than light.
(2) “The issues surrounding s377A are about morality, not modernity or being cosmopolitan.”
4. Best Sleight of Hand
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Arguing that we can recognize racial minorities, but we cannot recognize “sexual” minorities like gays.
Quote: “Race is a fixed trait. It remains controversial whether homosexual orientation is genetic or environmental, perhaps both. There are no ex-Blacks but there are ex-gays. The analogy between race and sexual orientation or preferred sexual preferences, is false.”
Molly’s adaptation: “Race is a fixed trait. There are no ex-Blacks, but there are ex-women. The analogy between race and sex is false and women have no right to demand equality. We cannot allow them to hijack a noble cause for their own use.”
5. Best “Proof from Assumption’ Award:
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Claiming that homosexuals are not working for human rights because they are wronging humanity.
Quote: “Homosexual activists often try to infiltrate and hijack human rights initiatives to serve their political agenda, discrediting an otherwise noble cause to protect the weak and poor. You cannot make a human wrong a human right.”
6. Worst rhetorical question:
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Lumping homosexuality, bestiality, incest and paedophilia in one rhetorical question.
Quote: “Sexual minorities’ and ‘sexual orientation’ are vague terms – covering anything from homosexuality, bestiality, incest, paedophilia – do all these minority sexual practices merit protection?”
Molly’s response: There are reasons for the law to protect individuals from incest and pedophilia. There are also reasons for the law to protect individuals from homosexuals. For instance, homosexuals should not be allowed to rape anyone or outrage their modesty. But this is no argument for criminalizing gay sex categorically. To repeal 377A is NOT to protect homosexuals. It merely stops defining their sexual acts as illegal. Individuals who do not wish to engage in homosexual sex with homosexuals are still protected by other laws.
7. Most Hilarious Claim Award:
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move: Claiming that her colleague’s article is “well-researched and cogent.”Quote: “I have noted a disturbing phenomenon over the 377A debate - the argument by insult. Instead of reasoning, some have resorted to name-calling to intimidate and silence their opponents. People with principled moral objections to the homosexual agenda are tarred and feathered ‘homophobes’, ‘bigots’, to shut them up. . . .
“One of my colleagues, a young professor, suffered these vicious tactics when the Straits Times published an article this May where Yvonne Lee argued against repealing 377A. This well-researched, cogent article so incensed homosexual activists that they flooded her with a torrent of abusive, lewd emails and wrote to her head of department calling for her to be removed from her job. This appeared to be a co-ordinated campaign.”
Molly’s Response: Are we thinking of the same article? http://mollymeek.livejournal.com/153526.h
8. The Tear-Jerking Altruist Award:
Winner: NMP Thio Li-Ann
Winning Move:Speaking out against gays/for retaining 377A despite the risk of being excommunicated.
Quote: "I speak, at the risk of being burned at the stake by militant activists. But if we don’t stand for something, we will fall for anything. I was raised to believe in speaking out for what is right, good and true, no matter the cost."
Molly's Response: Excessively zealous attempts at righteousness, particularly a compulsion to claim that one is right, is simply self-righteousness. Nevertheless, NMP Thio doesn't have to worry about being burned at the stake. This is really the practice of more respectable people who believe in a certain expression of morality. People may tear apart your claims, but no one will tear apart your body. On the contrary, Molly thinks your colleague NMP Siew Kum Hong seems more to be at risk of being burned at the stake by certain militant people. And he, too, believes in speaking out for what is right.
Source of information: theonlinecitizen
