TLY | Fine，but how come？

03-30

This article only shares the opinion from the delegate of the conference held by ModelUN and has nothing to do with the outside of the SYMUN.

Today, on the topic of homosexual-marriage legislation, the first session in Taiwan Legislative Yuan is launched out successfully. The topic is to discuss whether a new law should be carried out or to revise the current law.

After all delegates put themselves into the conference, the first conflict of mindset

is soon revealed, which is how society, on the degree of stability, would be

affected by both actions, say, examining the value. Delegates who stand with

amending the current civil code hold that the existence of special law would

exacerbate inequality based on sexual orientation; on the other hand, delegates

who advocate for a new law emphasize that religious and anti-homosexual group

would be agitated by simply amending the law. Refutation stirringly pushes

forward the discussion.

Seems like all things work well. However, after the first half hour, nothing further

or deeper on the topic of legislation is stressed by delegates. What clear is

most delegates repeat their statements again and again, with decorative linguistic

appeals and no evidence given to enhance the validity of idea. Take delegate Wang,

Jin-Ping』s speech as an example. The idea that marriage can only be happened in

a heterosexual relationship is solid since we are sapiens, which he emphasizes

twice at the conference. The piece of information offered is quite impressed

but not so moved. Someone may easily argue against that how come this ideology influence

people』s position regarding the same-sex relationship.

Another case is given on the delegate Lin De-Fu. Always being an inspiring role at the

conference, he states his point that establishing a new law would lead to a

fatal harm on social equality and a tremendous consume of human resources. The

point of workload he addresses is enlightening, because creating a new law

targeted to homosexual group does cost effort and time, which is unwilling to

see by government. More importantly, no one ever weigh the value of it. That

the thesis is original and the oral expression is impressive has to guarantee a

good argument, hasn』t it?

Delivering messages fluently and thoughtfully, most delegates present a remarkable point

of view, which is absolutely worth an appreciation. However, without support,

thesis itself fails to provide a good argument that would win what the speaker

wants. By the roots, the art of persuasion is how it functions to audience,

rather than the complexity of idea or diction.

The Author：Stella Ye