No sir, I don't think that's quite right.
I deeply respect your opinion, but I am afraid I cannot agree. You must understand the bond that exists between owner and house. People get attached to their houses, they put a lot of work into them, and it is truly dreadful to see that destroyed.
It's more than just a money issue, more than just the work of rebuilding a house, buying new clothes; it's a deeply spiritual issue: a home is a sanctuary, a fortress against the larger world. Personally, I would not think it joyful to watch it burn down.
I don't mean to pry into your personal business sir, but has your house ever burned down? I don't want to presume anything, but I think you might feel differently if it had.
Well, if you ask for my opinion, I have to say that the horse should not be mourned for, but rather the drowner himself. You see, it is not his own fault, but rather the fault of the cruel, miserable world he was raised in, where horse-drowning is tolerated. As to who should do the mourning, it is the whole world, for we cannot ignore the life of even one horse-drowner. Or course, the matter is open for interpretation and I would be very interested to hear your opinion.
Are you accusing me of drowning horses?
Sir, I assure you, I may have drowned a few horses in my youth, but my horse-drowning days are long past.
Yes, again, your horses are perfectly safe with me.
Well, I do believe that it is a reasonable precaution. You see, water has two primary uses: extinguishing burning houses and drowning horses. It's unfortunate that the two sometimes overlap, but it's inevitable.
I've always said that it's unfortunate when business interests and personal interests conflict, but I hope you can trust my judgment.
Thank you for your concern.
