I saw that the China Television Association was also criticizing Zheng Shuang, but the comment that topped the first one was whether the unethical male artists could be fixed as well, and made a long list of male artists.
The company’s main goal is to provide the best possible service to its customers. The official media did not take the first Time to restore the whole process of the incident, and the official agencies did not investigate and verify whether Zheng Shuang had violated the law or not, but directly made the decision to block the case, and it is doubtful whether such behavior is in accordance with Chinese law.
If there is no legal basis for a punitive act, and the punishment can be made directly according to the trend of public opinion, what kind of society is this?
The day before yesterday an official body criticized Zheng Shuang, saying that she exploited the legal loopholes. But in fact, if she was a surrogate in California, the behavior was in accordance with the local laws, so why did she exploit the loopholes of Chinese laws?
I’m not defending Zheng Shuang, I don’t know her, just talking about logic.
There are nearly 200 countries in the world and the laws vary greatly from country to country. If you run to a country and your behavior is in line with local laws, but maybe not in line with Chinese public opinion vetting standards, and then you are deemed to have exploited the legal loopholes and are collectively beaten up, isn’t that a bit scary for the society?
Because then the social rules would be too unpredictable and everyone would feel unsafe.
Surrogacy is illegal in China, but the penalties are for medical institutions and doctors, not for individuals. In the personal sphere, the issue is very controversial.
In the lopsided public opinion, there is no room for even a neutral general law analysis. As long as you don’t take a flagrant stand against surrogacy, you are subject to a barrage of criticism.
This is irrational.
Officials should be the coordinators, analyzers, and leaders of public opinion, not the followers. Otherwise, I see them now checking on these male artists in the back or not?
If they don’t, they’ll be called out for siding with men and being unfair to women. And if the remedy goes on, believe it or not, after this wave of people finished, there will be another list coming up later.
The law is the bottom line of a society, but also a society can not break the boundaries of the rules. Even according to the law, the other party is a scum, we can not break the legal boundary to punish TA.
If we can judge people arbitrarily according to public opinion, it will be a society where everyone is at risk. There is a possibility that public opinion can be guided, and public opinion is sometimes immature.
Trial by public opinion or legislation by public opinion, instead of trial by law, or legislation according to research and scientific laws, is sometimes not essentially different from decision making by patting one’s head.
The only difference is whether a person is patting his head or a collective one.
Recent Comments