Dumb Argument of the Month

I do a lot of criticizing ridiculous arguments. Perhaps I will make this a regular series. For now, lets just reflect on this absurdity. To sum up, NYU visiting prof argued before the Singapore Parliament that gay sex should remain illegal in Singapore because it is "like sticking a straw up your nose to drink." OK, lets accept this ridiculous analogy for a moment just to show how dumb the argument is even if valid. I'm not a Singapore law expert, but I'm willing to wager a large amount of money that it is not illegal to drink through your nose with a straw. Therefore, unless she mistook this for the other speech she was scheduled to make later in the week on the criminalization of nose-straws her argument is pretty terrible. "Hey, this act is the moral equivalent of this other legal act so it should clearly be illegal." Umm, what? Sorry, I missed the part where logic dictated the result you were arguing for.

While Dr. Thio continues her quest for the criminalization of nose-straws I for one will go ahead and issue her a big old DAMN your dumb. Also, the 'N' makes no sense, but the recipients of this award won't be able to create a logical argument as to why its inappropriate. They may not even recognize that it doesn't fit so we don't have to worry about it.

As for Thio's guest profesorship, the whole NYU student body should be pissed. Forget her viewpoints, NYU just signed on a prof that is incapable of syllogistic reasoning. Since that is the basis for our entire judicial system I feel it is a rather large fault for a law professor to have. I realize she is teaching Human Rights in Asia, but I'm guessing NYU could find an Asian Human Rights lawyer who also understood the American legal system...or at least could get half the questions right on the logic section of the LSATs. I'm thinking Thio gets like 25%-30% right.

Madison