So, it's unfeasible to either prove or disprove its safety. Claiming there is no scientific basis then is doubly irrelevant, in addition to laws often not requ

So, it's unfeasible to either prove or disprove its safety. Claiming there is no scientific basis then is doubly irrelevant, in addition to laws often not requiring scientific studies to be passed. It sounds like it's trying to fool people, specially "science defenders". I think it's dishonest, and people will notice. "Think of the kids" is used by a lot of media articles hammering the "big tech is bad" anvil. It poses a contradiction. They're trying to justify it by saying it will harm only small businesses ("think of the poor small businesses!"). However, there is the contradiction of the same media articles having had created the very same hysteria that pushes people to support the act. It is not helping to sell why one would vote against it. I said it bluntly: it opens a loophole for US Great Firewall. That argument will sell to both the right and the left, and it will be untouchable. It is also rooted in truth. I also provided solid questions that, if made in opposition to the act, will stop it. But there needs to be a stop to the sensationalist media too (everybody wins, media conglomerates lose a very small, already known to be ineffective tabloid thematic). I am trying to help the poorly written article to be better written.