In January, a Racine, Wisconsin, city commission committee voted unanimously against adopting an ordinance that would have changed all references to pet “owners” to pet “guardians” in the city’s ordinances. The animal rights activists pushing the change calmly replied that the committee’s decision itself constituted animal cruelty.
Racine’s Ad Hoc Animal Ordinance Committee rejected the proposed change for a number of reasons, according to The Journal Times (Racine, WI), including the fact that it isn’t clear how the change would affect the legal status of animals and the clear effort by animal rights activists to use the “guardian” language as the first step in changing legal consideration of animals from property to persons.
This drew the ire of the animal rights activists who had pushed the ordinance change. Alan Eisenberg, a board member of Racine’s HOPE Safehouse, told The Journal Times,
I deem their [the committee] conduct today to be brutally insensitive and in and of itself an act of animal cruelty.
Gee, you have to wonder who tipped the committee off that the guardian language changes are being promoted by clueless animal rights extremists!
The final decision on the proposed language change rests with the Racine City Council, but The Journal Times reported that it was expected to follow the committee’s recommendations.
Animal linguistics: In Racine, pets are still ‘owned’. Rob Golub, The Journal Times, February 1, 2005.
The woman behind the most successful radical group in America. Michael Specter, The New Yorker, April 14, 2003.