the absurd observers

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

Prosecutors think dog is human

Link

Apparently, prosecutors in Arkansas sent out a subpoena for a murder suspect's dog. This raises many different issues ranging from "could a dog be a witness?" to "why does it seem like Keanu Reeves is running the prosecutor's office?" However, the question I am mulling over is whether people should convince their dogs to take their last names?

I think that dogs should take their owners' last names. Here's why:
  1. Things without last names sound pretentious and preposterous. Think: Cher, Madonna, W., Fedex. They all sound ridiculous. Furthermore, think about what would happen if we took away last names: Michael J. _____, the Foreman ______, Jello Pudding ______.
  2. What would Scooby Doo have been without the Doo? Just Scooby? I don't know, sounds a little casual for a reference to the dog who saved so many days and dehooded so many evil-doers. Surely the Doo family would have been upset. In fact, it is making me upset right now to think that he could have just been Scooby. Why? Because he was so much more. He will always be Mr. Doo to me.
  3. Because dogs are just as important as people doesn't mean that we should allow a breakdown in the family unit. Dogs without last names would confuse our children. It would threaten the family as we know it. I would think right-wingers would join me on this point. Traditional family values start with last names for dogs.
  4. Dogs save lives, comfort people, entertain, serve as companions, and look funny when they eat peanut butter out of a jar. And that's more than I can say about some people and we let them have last names.
  5. Maybe it's time we get past the tough guy attitude and admit that dogs deserve last names because we think of them as family, and it's the thought that counts. If you disagree with that, then you disagree with the theory behind greeting cards and smiling at people, and frankly you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

Dogs should also have middle names, but that's more of a religious argument.

3 Comments:

  • uuuu......... dogs are kool!!!!!!

    By Blogger pandemonium75, at 4:44 PM  

  • Where were you on the night of the 22nd?

    Woof!

    I see. And what did you see?

    Woof woof!

    We have a clear implication of guilt here, your honor...

    --

    What about cats? Do they get last names too?

    By Blogger Jesster, at 4:48 PM  

  • To paraphrase AIR BUD: "Ain't no [Federal] Rule [of Evidence] that says a dog can't [testify]!"

    http://www.moviequotes.com/repository.cgi?pg=3&tt=107070

    By Anonymous Mark, at 8:16 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home