There's this animal rights issue I have to address, but I have no idea where to start..
How do you address a change in routine or measures at a place, to facilitate the lack of "parental" concern in order to protect the "pet" (because if the parent was present the change would be unnecessary..) but because you've witnessed a situation in which a "parent" wasn't present and although you didn't witness anything, and although perhaps nothing bad took place then..
Perhaps you just knew the situation was just designed badly and needed to be altered, but you knew that once you said something it would be interpreted to the extreme, especially because you need to suggest it in order to avoid an extreme... and if you don't say anything, nobody's feelings are hurt but animals could be in grave danger... or you say something, and everybody's feelings are hurt and animals are now safer or in even greater danger, when there may have been no danger to begin with and stupid parents need to just ******* get with it.
I don't usually question if I should say something, but there's a verse I came across in the Bible the last time a similar situation presented itself.. but I only found it after I had said the something in that case..
"Do not accuse your neighbour
when he has done you no wrong."
Actual verse:
PROVERBS THREE (VERSES 27-30)
"Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due,
when it is in your power to act.
Do not say to your neighbor,
'Come back tomorrow and I'll give it to you'—
when you already have it with you.
Do not plot harm against your neighbor,
who lives trustfully near you.
Do not accuse anyone for no reason—
when they have done you no harm."
