• @jazzfes
    link
    1
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    In what way am I not discussing the content of the law? I’m asking questions, you seem the specialist. If you don’t know the answers, fine, there is no harm in saying so.

    The assumptions you mention are just normal things to consider when discussing a law, in any country. Calling it a strawman is, frankly, just lazy. I asked questions that you can address directly. I don’t speak Chinese, so I specifically didn’t comment on the actual law, which I can’t read, but solely on the links you provided.

    Also it’s not whether “China needs any additional laws to coerce people to do anything”. It’s about whether a law can be used to coerce people. And the law, the way you presented it, absolutely can.

    I further encourage you to read into how child abuse laws have been used and abused historically. I provided prompts to get you started.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      12 years ago

      You’re discussing an article that talks about the law and doesn’t have any specifics of what the law actually states. I’ve repeatedly stated that I have not looked at the details of the law, but the description in the article seems reasonable to me, and it appears to be in line with other policies intended to make life better for people.

      You’re the one trying to create a conspiracy theory here, and so it’s on you to show that there is something nefarious happening.