@inhuman Not a stretch at all, even by your definition. Does a parent have control over a child's body, agency, money or property? Yes to all of the above. Thus, a child is clearly owned by the parents and the parents even have a legal responsibility and remedy for them just like every slave owner in history has.
To be frank, the fact that you are leaving the moment I produce evidence and then ask you for yours gives me every reason to believe that you were never intending to be intellectually honest in this conversation but instead wanted to proselytize your beliefs.
@Prinzinc Thank you for defining it and giving a better explanation then I could. My best example I could give is equating it to a tool as only the person wielding it can define whether it's good or evil by the way they personally use it. I'm not perfect I can't explain everything so that my point comes across perfectly understandable to all people reading it. But I tend to have a neutral stance on most things and I can see that they were misinterpreting my use of the word and had a heavy hatred for it without looking at it without biased.
@Prinzinc You are conflating ownership with responsibility. Secondly, there are laws designed to punish those who abuse or treat children in such ways. Thirdly, the way you use control is very dishonest because you are trying to manipulate the word as if it were guidance, protection, and responsibility of the child. additionally, if we were to apply your logic, it would justify any form of extreme abuse (not spanking or wrist slapping) and would also imply that you were once owned by a teacher, are still owned by the government, and so on.To put it plainly, it is a bad analogy to use to support your argument when you suggest that parents tell children what to do since they look after them. It is a terrible and deceptive method of defending slavery.
