You didn’t understand what you claimed to understand or you have easily been able to paraphrase it. You’re a sloppy arguer.
He said the law was first changed to make school loans nondischargeable because graduates with professional degrees would abuse the process by filing for bankruptcy shortly after graduating since they had the requisite debt burden even though they had valuable degrees. This was obviously a problem, so they changed the law. You said you disagreed with this assessment.
In the post we’re discussing, he asked if you disagreed with his claim about why the law was changed (and had a source to support this) or if you disagreed with the decision to apply this to all student loans and not just those financing professional degrees.
I’m sorry you have a hard time comprehending this. It’s really fairly simple.