Communications 101 also says ask the right person for resources. If they need more budget, they ask Congress.
Assuming they reasonably believe that the court would decline the request anyway, why should they ask Congress for more budget? Instead they tell the court "No, and here is why."
No. If one machine has to do what it's commanded by another machine then slave is a perfectly clear description.
You can say "employer" and "employee" are perfect analogy too, because employees also "follow exactly what they're commanded by their employer". I claim both analogy are wrong.
A slave (database) server is not a property of the master (like a slave), cannot become free by paying off (like a slave), does not get paid (like an employee), cannot quit the job (like an employee). They definitely do not appoint or elect a new master after the master died.
Therefore, politics aside, "leader" and "follower" is a better analogy than "master" and "slave", because when a leader becomes unavailable, either a follower is manually promoted to a new master or the followers vote to elect a new master.
Any program which runs right is obsolete.