“Androids don’t eat, Miss Chapel.”
Creamed chipped beef, AKA Shit on a Shingle, or Snot and Foreskins. Wow. Someone actually thought of cooking beef in milk. And it’s actually pretty good. Oh, yeah, there’s also ‘cheeseburgers’. Those are pretty good, too. And there’s something else I can’t remember the name of, which required boiling hamburger in milk, and then pouring it over the veggies and biscuits. That was good, too. Lucky for me, I’m not Jewish, or I’d be screwed.
Any other culinary-religious questions?
I refer you to earlier in your own post.
It doesn’t cause stupidity, merely encourages and emphasizes it.
Yeah, that was asinine.
Can I get an amen?! It also makes blatant contradictions and lack of logical sense seem virtuous.
Try it also with the people who speak the thousands of languages in which there isn’t a single word which translates as “meat” in “the meat of a cow”, “the meat of a trout” and “the meat of a peach”.
And another obviously-asinine non-point.
Given the quality of your OP, what did you expect?
At minimum, I expect to consider the semantics of the language we speak and are currently conversing in and not step laterally into the irrelevance that is other tongues. In the language called ENGLISH the word “meat”, in reference to animal flesh, has a specific meaning. It’s completely irrelevant that some other language may or may not have an all-encompassing word that is synonymous with our word “meat”.
Equally irrelevant is that meat is sometimes used metaphorically to refer to vegetation. Or that Topic Reiner once played a character unflatteringly nicknamed “Meathead”. Or that strangers can meet each other at the supermarket. Or that the crux of the situation can be referred to as the “meat of the matter”.
See you’re repeating the same error that has already been debunked in this thread.
It has several meanings, as has been pointed out. Once again, note the definitions here
From American Heritage Dictionary:
From the Collins Dictionary:
There is a broad sense of “meat” in English that covers all animals and there is also a common narrower sense that excludes fish and often poultry.
It is.
So if I understand correctly, a dish that combines chicken or turkey with a dairy product would not be kosher?
Pity. If they did, Miss Chapel would be a lot happier.
Tacit Knowledge: If you wish to be Correct, and use the Literal Meanings of words, do note that ‘British’ and ‘English’ are mutually-exclusive categories.
OK, and your point? I didn’t say anything about British. I said English, as in the LANGUAGE known as ENGLISH. How does that warrant your pointing out that “English” and “British” don’t mean the same thing? No one implied that they do.
Also, no, they aren’t mutually exclusive. A large proportion of everyone who is English are, in fact, also British. The two terms are almost (but not quite) a set and subset.
If you wish to be Correct, and use the Literal Meanings of words, that is.
Only in the Degraded and Debased English most of you ignorant lot currently speak. In the True And Correct English, ‘British’ refers to the Brythonic peoples, who are Celtic natives to the Isles, and ‘English’ refers to the Angles, who are Germanic tribesmen and immigrants, if not invaders.
We know my way is Correct because it is older, it makes distinctions without a difference, it prevents people from using the language to say what they mean in a convenient fashion, and, best of all, it is contrary to how the language is generally used, making me Better than you, as I can beat you over the head with my rule whenever I believe you to be getting Above Yourself, by which I mean above My August Personage. Tacit Knowledge knows the feeling well, I warrant.
Grin! I like that reasoning! Discommoding others with language is so much fun!
“Throatwarbler Mangrove” comes to mind!