Source 1, Animals as Property

1.)  Briefly (2-3 sentences) summarize the article.
     Animal should not be considered property under the law because unlike inanimate objects, they are sentient beings with their own lives and interests. Thus, the law should change the property status of animals to reflect the social values.

2.) Explain the passage's CENTRAL ARGUMENT. What claims does the author make?
     The author of this article claims that animals should not be considered property.

3.) Find TWO ASSERTIONS that support the central argument. Explain how each assertion contributes to the author's main argument.
     "In most cases, you have a legal right to destroy your own property. If someone decides to chop up their kitchen table and use it for firewood, that is their legal right. But if someone abuses or neglects an animal, they should be criminally prosecuted". This assertion shows/states the difference between pets and property.
     "Most Americans consider their animals to be part of the family". This assertion shows the common social value of pets to convince people that animals aren't property.