- Joined
- Feb 9, 2011
- Messages
- 19,981
- Reaction score
- 7,364
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
You were the one back in post 103 who said that you thought it should have been accept instead of embrace, but that it was just semantics. My point I originally made is that what some see as semantics others see a a major difference. It actually seems like you went 180 on your stance here, unless I missed something along the way. Which is possible. This Tapatalk format is not as easy to follow and keep track as with my laptop.Agreed it can happen with the word embrace but it hasn't yet.
this is the most irrelevant thing I've ever read. For the sake of all that is good in the world I am not saying language can't evolve. I'm just saying it hasn't evolved to the point where embrace is synonymous with tolerate. To use the word that way is to use it incorrectly in current parlance.
This is a load of excrement.
Hey argument is based on what the word means. You were carrying on about how language evolved and it has nothing to do with this.
Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk