religion

[paulgiamatti]

No, I just to carefully consider what the intellectual majority of people including scholars, authors, scientists, teachers, and yes, even theologians, regard as semantically correct.

It's like when people bring up egalitarianism as an end unto itself rather than a means to an end. Egalitarianism doesn't operate in a void - you can't just take one interpretation of it or one definition of it from a textbook and shoehorn it into the real world. There are more factors at play when considering huge, sweeping ideas like egalitarianism just like there are with every single word in the English lexicon.

A textbook definition isn't direction for application. It's just a definition. That's why dictionaries are constantly updated, refined and adapted to modern society.