John Wesley wrote:
> In article .com>,
> says...
>>Pet ownership may be analogous to slavery in terms of legal status
>>but it is not analaogus in a practical sense. Wesley's dog
>>has, we assume, a large degree of freedom and is no worse off than he
>>would be in the wild. The relationship between Wesley and his dog
>>is almost certainly close to the relationship between parent and child
>>than master and slave.
> Thanks,
For what?
> Glorfindel will never get it.
I certainly "get it." It is the way I feel about my own companion
animals, and why there is a movement today to replace "pet owner"
with "companion animal guardian" as the preferred term. But
until the *legal* status of animals changes -- until they are
no longer property -- nothing will really change.