If I see any more comments on Mumsnet of it's just a dog

[Lifeneedsaresetagain]

Do people not realise that for those who welcome them into the family they are part of the family. And if you have a dog and say it's just a dog, I'm not sure you should have one.

Yet you're unable to give examples.

I've said multiple times on this thread that I am an animal lover, that I adore my own pets, that I know full well how much they enrich lives. I'd love to know how, give that, you have picked up that I don't understand the value other people get from their animals.

You are insisting that people who value their own dog over your family are somehow ill, a loon or emotionally stunted.

I don’t need to give examples. Go back and read what and how you’re posting/responding to people.

Yes, I do believe that anyone who would genuinely choose the life of an animal over the life of a human, particularly a human baby, have something fundamental missing, and I don't think that's normal nor should it be. That opinion hasn't changed, ever. I will always think that. Regardless of the circumstance.

However, not once have I said or implied that people should not value and love their pets, or that I don't understand the bond you can have with an animal. If you've extrapolated that from what I've said then that's on you.

Struggling to see how me describing how I held my much loved elderly cat in my arms and sobbed while she was put to sleep last year and how I still miss her somehow equates to me saying I don't understand that people value and love their animals.

I do not have something missing because I will not rescue your baby. Rescue your own baby.

And you still have not provided case law about how someone can be charged with manslaughter for leaving a baby in a burning building. I am still waiting.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I think this is it. I’ve seen many people absolutely treating their dog like it’s their ‘baby’. Then actual babies come along and suddenly - It’s a dog. Most people who have had children realise the difference between loving a pet and loving your own child.

I also don’t actually think it matters what a dog owner THINKS about their own dog. As long as they don’t expect others to ACT as if their dog is a human, then it’s all good, surely?

Do you really not see how chilling that is? Jesus!

Yes you do. And it's not "my" baby, it's any baby. I cannot relate on any level at all to someone who places a higher value on the life of a dog than on the life of a human child.

As I said previously, I haven't got case law because it's never been tested - you know that. It's not the gotcha you think it is. If you were ever in situation where you had to choose whether or not to save a stranger's baby, or a dog, and you chose the dog, I very much doubt that the majority of decent, humane people would think that was normal and reasonable.

Exactly. I love my dogs fiercely. I do not expect other people to treat them the way we do. And this is the point we all live differently and that’s the way it should be.

No, sadly they don't. They seem to think it's justified because this hypothetical child's parents aren't present and therefore the baby would deserve to die.

Chilling is leaving your baby alone in a building and everyone else not know it is there. That is neglect and abandonment.

If I am in a burning building, I am grabbing what is close to me (my dog) and getting out. I am not a firefighter. I am not going to be looking for other people. Even firefighters get to a point where they concede and leave people to die.

How will I know the baby is there? FFS.

I really don't know why in this hypothetical scenario you think the baby's parents aren't able to save it themselves because its parents have abandoned it. 🤔

Not case law then, but there will be information online about it anyway. Show me.

A minority (I hope) of dog owners lose the capacity for rational thought. It’s almost like an illness.

What if the parents were visibly dead, and your dog was physically impaired and lying next to the crying baby - so you would have to carry either the dog or the baby? Which would you choose?

There is no situation where I would be next to a crying baby with my dog.

Ok I'll make it simple for you.

You're in a room with your dog and a baby. It doesn't matter why. The baby's parents aren't there. It doesn't matter why. The room will explode and you only have time to save either your dog or the baby.

This isn't a real scenario, it's a psychological test so it really doesn't matter whether you think it makes sense or not or where the parents are or whether you would know there was a baby in the building. The only fundamental thing that matters is that you would choose to save a dog over a human baby. If you would then I don't have anything else to say.

I could easily save both in that scenario. My dog isn't that big. One under each arm.

And consider how fortunate I am that everyone else is dead or injured yet I seem immune to the effects of the fire. I can probably pick them all up and just walk through the fire and out the door.

This is starting to look a bit like moral cowardice. You could give an honest answer, but you don’t want to because you know it’s awful.

This whole hypothetical argument is 🦇💩🤪. In real life people will save who they save. Have any of you having this argument actually been in such a scenario? Or a life and death scenario where you have to make decisions under pressure?

It does matter why, because you are name calling based on a bullshit hypothetical situation. If it is one that will never happen, then why you do you feel your insults are legitimate?

Go arm chair diagnose psychopathy someone else. Based on things that have actually happened.

That's not the test though, the test is you have to choose one. You can quibble about it all you want but ultimately what you're being asked is, would you save your dog or a stranger's baby if you could only save one.