That's the opinion of the Attorney-General. he's cleary wrong. but that's his opinion and he his entitled to it. I am not in his position

If you can not answer a man's argument, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names.

You can’t really win an argument against somebody’s feeling that something is just plain wrong.

The man who establishes his argument by noise and command knows that his reason is weak.

A man who has committed a mistake and doesn’t correct it, is committing another mistake.

But shall he argue, indeed, and then not take pains to avoid conducting himself recklessly and at haphazard in an argument? And if he does not, how will he any longer be the sort of man we think he is? (...) Let them show that he will be able, and all these speculations become mere superfluity, they were absurd and inconsistent with our preconception of the good man.

The Reformer is always right about what's wrong. However, he's often wrong about what is right.

He is irrational, however well he may be able to reason, who does not clearly see that good is good and truth truth.

He who establishes his argument by noise and command, shows that his reason is weak.

A man who is certain he is right is almost sure to be wrong.

Of course, the reader might argue that I was as stubborn in my viewpoint as they were in theirs. Yes, indeed, but I was right and they were wrong and that made the difference.

He who establishes his argument by noise and command shows that his reason is weak.

He was a pushy, self-righteous prig, but that didn’t mean he was wrong. Necessarily.

He that complies against his will.
Is of his own opinion still.