I think your last paragraph is really the crux of it. Technically, I’d agree with the statement “service [vs ‘support’?] animals should be reserved for those who need them”, except that I don’t think anyone can really define what “need” and “service” mean (or even “animal” and “reserved” really); I don’t think I’d agree with anyone who is actually using that statement in their line of arguments either. Competing needs can be a hard, or even impossible, problem to practically solve, but trying to find a global answer or rule for who gets precedence isn’t gonna be much help, which also makes it hard to regulate/legislate fairly.
I think your last paragraph is really the crux of it. Technically, I’d agree with the statement “service [vs ‘support’?] animals should be reserved for those who need them”, except that I don’t think anyone can really define what “need” and “service” mean (or even “animal” and “reserved” really); I don’t think I’d agree with anyone who is actually using that statement in their line of arguments either. Competing needs can be a hard, or even impossible, problem to practically solve, but trying to find a global answer or rule for who gets precedence isn’t gonna be much help, which also makes it hard to regulate/legislate fairly.