View Single Post
Old 10-19-03, 01:08 PM   #42 (permalink)
BWSmith's Avatar
Join Date: Oct-2002
Location: Georgia (USA)
Posts: 1,888
I won't even get into skirting the laws like that.

Has anyone had any negative first hand experience with having dependants instead of pets?
This has already been addressed here:
Those are where the term has been adopted into the laws. Now the door is open. As I said before, they will try anything to drastic until they have implimented the cahnge in many more places. Then they can test the waters and keep building on it. This is not an immediate devestation for pet owners, it is the beginning.
The do not do it so you can be charged with murder for flushing a gold fish. they do it cuzz it sounds like a good idea. They don't really think about how it could be interpretted.
Thank you. That is exactly why it is so dangerous. Ignorance to the possible future implications.

People are on the top of nature' hierarchy. Dogs cats snakes frogs and tortoises will never be treated like people.
The question was never will they be treated as people. It is an issue of a change in the responibilities and liabilities of the owner. At this point we can only imagine and speculate. But the evidence is there of intent and this gives them means. Should we wait until the first lawsuit goes through? Wait until they have legal precedence? Or strike now at each head of the leviathon. Remember, it is easier to break the egg than slay the dragon.
I planted some bird seed. A bird came up. Now I don't know what to feed it.
BWSmith is offline