Of course the underlying law is idiotic.
What I meant is that if we take the law as a given, then the exemption we are discussing here are very good and sensible. I wish they weren't needed, but given that they are, the language seems sensible.
What I meant is that if we take the law as a given, then the exemption we are discussing here are very good and sensible. I wish they weren't needed, but given that they are, the language seems sensible.
I really struggle to understand what you're trying to say. Is it that since the original law is dumb, we should accept no remedy short of getting rid of that original law? I think you'll find making progress in the real world very hard with that attitude.