Of course, which justifies you characterizing the articles as idiotic. (Unless that's not what was proposed at all, and the error is yours in assuming it was and/or that it was the necessary consequence.)

If nobody is making a good argument, that's a problem. It might ultimately fail, but if it does, it will fail for reasons that bear repeating, unless you don't care about democratic governance, because you're unlikely to get broad agreement about conclusions whose justification you don't talk about.