Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver  I think "mutilated" brings up some extreme connotations, so I don't know if I would use that word. |
Agreed! IMO, the use of the word in this instance merely <attempts> to blow things out of proportion.
There are many other instances in life where if the same logic were applied, use of the term 'mutilated' would be waaaay out of line and not tolerated.
Would you consider a neutered dog to be 'mutilated?'
What about an amputee patient? Someone who loses a finger in an accident, per say? Would it be OK to describe them as being 'mutilated?'
I think not. But the principal is the same, so what would make it an appropriate term here? Oh, that's right, because it's used in the face of argument to try prove a point.
