LogFAQs > #909647515

Funbazooka posted...

You disagreed with my claim that just because something is fully allowed doesn't mean it's okay.

I mean, everyone has a problem with something on some level even if they recognize that it's fully allowed where they live. No?

I don't understand why you can't admit that. That's what I'm driving at. If you can admit that, then fine, chalk all this up to a miscommunication.

Again, you're just not understanding what "fully allowed" means. Its literally identical to saying "nothing wrong with". You keep trying to equate "fully allowed" to just meaning that it is legal, I keep telling you you're wrong for that.

Idk how many more times I can clearly and accurately reiterate my message for you to just keep making the same mistake over and over.

"Fully allowed"="nothing wrong with"

Ok? Hence me saying:

No, with the terms that I was using that's impossible. Something being "allowable" in the sense that I was using it by definition cannot be "wrong".

So to run it back, I was referring to believing Ford or Kavanaugh's testimonies. There is nothing wrong with believing either of them, I stated that by saying "believing Ford was totally allowable", which is no different than saying "there's nothing wrong with believing Ford"

This is your last chance to understand this very simple sentiment before I give up on you.
---

Now you can't call me a sigless user.