Animals vs humans round 2

[livingzuid]

I was enjoying our previous debate started by Fifi. Not sure if we were done!

AIBU to think if faced with choosing a pet over a human (even if a stranger), you should choose the human?

The idea was brought up in another thread and put in life or death situation. Building on fire contains your pet and a stranger. You could only save one, who would it be?

I had a dog, Ralph, I cried my heart out when he died 3 years ago. The only dog I wasn't scared of! But I can't imagine leaving a person to die instead, no matter how my heart would break.

MardyBra there are plenty of things I would like to say to people on this thread but I don't bloody say them all as they are innapropriate for this debate. In return, Iw ould ask that you don't start with the sarcastic insults.

Just go ahead and say it Urgent. I don't give a shit.

Goodness. Another PA (anybigfuckingjessie's this time) deleted!

The dog savers come across as quite extreme to me (and some others). It provokes strong reactions.

No I won't, because I don't want to sink to the level that some people, including you, have. I do not believe for a second that I am morally superior to anyone, I may be immoral but I can still justify my decisions. Just because a reason isn't morally right, doesn't mean it is pointless. Dropping an atom bomb on Hiroshima was beyond immoral, but they still discussed it, and it still happened.

I realise things have moved on but can I just point out the original thread question was an adult stranger v pet. Then posters started bringing children and wasps into the equation and it all went a bit crazy.

"MardyBra there are plenty of things I would like to say to people on this thread but I don't bloody say them all as they are innapropriate for this debate. In return, Iw ould ask that you don't start with the sarcastic insults."

There have been jibe after jibe about being sanctimonious, disablist and bullying, yet nobody has named anyone and as far as I can see nobody has been reported and deleted, apart from a couple of people in thread 1, who are no longer in the debate.

'In other words, he doesn't believe for a minute that the 40% would do it'

I don't get that from that paragraph at all. The emotional answers are more likely to be accurate. In the moment, you won't think logically, it will be instinct (which is driven more by emotion than logic).

Urgent...so answer my question.

Would you be completely understanding of a person who saved their dog whilst leaving your child to die?

Keeping No, but I wouldn't be understanding if they'd saved their child over my sister either. My dog is equal to all family members as far as I'm concerned, I would only save them first because I have a stronger bond with them.

'And if that;s not a goady statement then what is?'

It was a light-hearted comment? I did a face and everything?!

I would save a person Outraged because they are a person pure and simple. Nothing to do with selfish or not selfish. I have posted on this thread and the last.
Up to you whether you choose to believe me or not.

Maryz as much as I disagree with some of your statements, I can honestly say that I didn't report them. I've never seen the pount in deleting posts anyway, why would you delete something and in the process ruin the flow of the discussion. It's like deleting a controversial page from a book

OutragedFromLeeds ah it was my post you were on about. I see now.

Well the thing is you already know I value human life even above puppies so you know where I really stand. Apparently I'm a little weird and cruel for preferring humans.

I would even save a murderer or abuser over a dog so I'd certainly save you.

Then I'd call the police to have them arrested and I would hope they would go to prison for life. Clearly some would have trouble understanding that.