Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I have been told for years on this site that I have to adhere to every interpretation by the NF and now we have the same people who were holier-than-thou about those topics trying to tell others what they disagree with. But when it was another issue, "But that is the rule or interpretation." Sorry as I find that rather ironic and mostly funny.
It is an interpretation. I get it that it is not popular, but those are the interpretations, right? What do we do when someone calls us to the carpet on the interpretation and we called something different?
Peace
|
You just don't get it. That's OK, not everyone can understand.
It isn't that we're just disagreeing with an interpretation. The interpretation itself contradicts the rule. As such, we have two opposing rulings, both of which can't be correct. We're going with the one that has been there for 50+ years vs. one that came out of nowhere. The new interpretation can't be correct without a rule change.