Quote:
|
Originally Posted by darci
I am sorry Peggy I mean no disrespect to you, but it's just a word.
|
Actually, no it isn't. In reality I don't think whomever comprised the profile question has any agenda or even realizes what the implications of the term are. What it does illustrate beautifully is the success of the animal rights agenda to permeate our thoughts and terminology. We're no longer pet owners, we're pet "parents" according to the PetsMart commercials. From a legal aspect and that is what is important to remember here, guardian holds much different ramifications than does owner. IF we want to continue to be able what we and our veterinarians consider responsible and appropriate decisions about the care and well-being of all our pets; then it is imperative we continue to be their owners and they our property.
Quote:
|
Again I say I havent seen anything on this site to suggest its anything other than what it is... A fun way for us to meet and discuss this wonderful breed.
|
As I said, I think the use of the word guardian was done naively and with the attempt to be politcally correct. HOWEVER, for those of us watching our ability to own pets of our choice be attacked and whittled away at legislatively state by state, locale by locale; the word guardian has very negative implications and ramifications.
Debbie