Thats a complete cop out. You cant abstract away the fundamental issue at hand. Conclusions and rhetoric have a genealogy in its logical process...Obviously this issue is meaningful to Rock, and thats understandable and noble. if you guys are going to get all sanctimonious, then you have to respect Rock's positions on their own terms.
Boss, dad, leader, commander-in-chief --- nuanced differences, but relatable. You can call your dad a retard. You can have your boss fired. You can listen to all of them, and summarily dismiss them as well. He never suggested obedience.
what am i coping out of? i have taken no position on the actual issue of gun control and i have no idea on whether his position is understandable and noble and i dont really care whether this issue is meaningful to chris rock, if that makes it a cop out, then i agree im coping out
but i think the logic he used is what the problem is, i respect his freedom to have his opinion on the subject but i dont have to respect his logic, and no i dont have to respect his terms, i dont know why you would think that
and yeah its definitely a semantic argument because different words referring to a person in charge have different connotations to it, and i disagree with the connotation of 'dad' and 'boss', you are the one that is actually copping out by ignoring the connotations, boss and dad does connotate obedience thats exactly why we object to it
other words for person's in charge are king, master, dictator, those types of words are not appropriate in referring to a president in a democracy or in making an argument pro or con