Bip-110 merely proposes to roll back a small change that was made that has large ramifications. It's just a start to dealing with the problem, but it is a start. The counterargument is to do nothing. The core devs don't want to cut off data stuffing because they have a boner for EVM.

I do not accept that the small number of individuals in possession of credentials to merge pull requests in that repo are the infallible high priests of Bitcoin. We all signed up for "don't trust, verify," yet some people trust their judgement implicitly.

Fortunately the nature of the network is such that they are not really in control of anything other than a GitHub repo. This may result in a fork and I'm fine with that. That's how open source works. Here's what will happen in that event:

The EVM-wannabe shitcoin network running Core v0.30 will begin to be inundated with CSAM and other illicit content. This will happen because it can happen, and because certain individuals on the new fork will have an axe to grind. Certain actors will do this and begin reporting IP addresses to law enforcement for hosting and distributing this content. It's not happening like this yet because we're all still sharing the same blockchain.

The fork that continues to iterate to prevent this attack vector and preserve the original use case as peer-to-peer electronic cash will survive in the long run. The notion that no matter what happens, Bitcoin is too big, too powerful, too perfect to fail is dangerous hubris. The network is as strong as the vigilance of it's individual participants. It was designed this way, and complacency can kill it in many ways.