Family property

[Moxie]

Suppose a free man has a dog; the dog is the man's property. The man neglects the dog: never feeds it, leaves it out in the snow, chains it to a tree 24/7, beats it. Is there any recourse for the dog?

Suppose the free man's children were neglected: malnourished, no coat or protective shoes for the snow, no care for their health, forced isolation in their room after school and chores, no friends allowed, beats the kids. Any recourse for them?

Suppose the free man has an aquarium of tropical fish he has neglected to care for: filthy water, diseased fish gasping for air, etc. The man's visiting friend sees the fish suffering, brings it to the attention of the man, but the man doesn't care and does nothing. Do the fish have recourse?

See where I'm going? Your thoughts?

[Chex]

Do the fish have recourse?

[Moxie]

Great story! I've had those kind of dinner convos, too! Usually doesn't end pretty though. lol

So: are you trying to say that, because the free man's dog/child/fish is under his stewardship, and the state doesn't own them, but God does, that no matter how much the possessions are suffering, it is still no one else's business?

[Moxie]

[pumpkin]

Moxie, the things you asked about in the original post, there can be recourse in each case. But these cases cannot be brought in law, they would be considered in equity. The reason is because there is a trust relationship in each situation. The man is the trustee or fiduciary, and the others (kids, dogs, fish) are the beneficiary. The man owes a duty to each and must provide care for each. That care must be adequate. In equity court the judge has full discretion and can create an order to remedy the situation. If that order is disobeyed, then it becomes an issue of law and you can go to jail over it.