Circular Logic example isn't great #72
Description
'Stripping privacy rights only matters to those with something to hide. You must have something to hide if you oppose stripping privacy rights.'
The first sentence says that if stripping privacy rights matters to you, then you have something to hide; the second sentence says if you oppose stripping privacy rights, then you must have something to hide. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't circular logic more about having one of the sentences going the other way?