Skutnabb-Kangas, Kontra, and Phillipson's response to Wee (2005) only serves to highlight a whole new set of problems with the LHRs paradigm while failing to make any inroads towards resolving the earlier ones. For example, they adopt a "legal perspective" in relation to Singlish that is at odds with the way they would presumably wish to deal with linguistic discrimination elsewhere. The three authors also assume that levels of disadvantage can be measured, such that inter-language discrimination should be prioritized over intra-language discrimination. They treat group membership as simply a matter of individual choice, thus erasing much of the complex political negotiations involved. Finally, they collapse important distinctions between the kinds of rights that individuals, groups and languages can reasonably be considered to possess. In this contribution, I elaborate on these four points.