They're both drowning, you can save only one... (1 Viewer)

[AhrnCityPahnder]

110 people voted dog? I hope you dog voters drown while some guy saves his dog instead of you, i also hope your children are watching.

I can swim, and I don't have any children. Anything else you hope for?

yep, that you are drowing because you are unconsious, and your parents and or SO are watching.

OK. I guess my hope for you is that you don't ever go swimming with my dog. edit for grammar

 

[TheIronSheik]

Put it this way.If my dog and I were both drowning I'd tell whoever was trying to save me to save the dog instead.

I said the same thing. And to me, that show just how unselfish you can be. Why do people think that is morally wrong?I still want to hear from people who chose the stranger:Would you save the homeless crackhead or the seeing eye dog?

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Would you save the homeless crackhead or the seeing eye dog?

I'd save the crackhead.

 

[Politician Spock]

Would you save the homeless crackhead or the seeing eye dog?

I'd save the crackhead.

Business decision?

 

[TheIronSheik]

Would you save the homeless crackhead or the seeing eye dog?

I'd save the crackhead.

Hold on. Let me clarify:A seeing eye dog and a crack head NOT related to you.

 

[Grackle Squad]

I do not have to have a reason for why it is obvious in order for me to state that it's obvious.

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing. I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being. The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

 

[Grackle Squad]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing. I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being. The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

It's truly sad to me that people preach their opinions as fact.

 

[Team]

Put it this way.If my dog and I were both drowning I'd tell whoever was trying to save me to save the dog instead.

You'd seriously rather die than see your dog die?Have you given any thought on how that decision might effect your wife, kids, parents? How will your dog support them? raise them?

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

It's truly sad to me that people preach their opinions as fact.

Where is there something stated as a fact in my statement?

 

[Smoo]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

 

[TheIronSheik]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

 

[TheIronSheik]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

OK. Good. Now I know your just an imbecile. And that's cool. I'm not going to judge. I just wanted to know so I can stop wasting time arguing.

 

[CrossEyed]

OK. Good. Now I know your just an imbecile. And that's cool. I'm not going to judge. I just wanted to know so I can stop wasting time arguing.

Oh, how I love irony.

 

[Smoo]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

I think it's morally reprehensible that somebody hasn't seen the Big Lebowski."I am the Walrus.I am the Walrus.I am the Warus."

 

[HERBERT THE HIPPO]

I have three dogs and I can say with 100% honesty that I would try to save all three dogs before the stranger. After I was sure that the dogs were safe and sound, and after a short nap and a little snack, I would certainly go back and try to save the stranger. Really.

 

[Politician Spock]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

ALWAYS.

 

[Psychopav]

OK. Good. Now I know your just an imbecile. And that's cool. I'm not going to judge. I just wanted to know so I can stop wasting time arguing.

Oh, how I love irony.

How do you feel about signatures?

 

[Punk]

Can most dogs not swim? Every dog I have ever had has been a good swimmer....and you save the stranger.These people saying your pets "are like" your children are just kidding yourselves. The fact is, they ARE NOT your children and ARE NOT human. Get over it.

 

[Politician Spock]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

ALWAYS.

20 more kids will probably die, but at least the 80 year old homeless drunk is safe.

 

[Grackle Squad]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing. I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being. The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

ALWAYS.

Says who?

 

[TheIronSheik]

OK. Good. Now I know your just an imbecile. And that's cool. I'm not going to judge. I just wanted to know so I can stop wasting time arguing.

Oh, how I love irony.

Once again, pointing out that my second language has some errors in its grammar usage and the fact that you are too proud and stubborn to admit that you are wrong are two totally different types of 'stupid'.

 

[HERBERT THE HIPPO]

Life expectancy of popular dog breeds:

Afghan Hound (12.0)

Airedale Terrier (11.2)

Basset Hound (12.8)

Beagle (13.3)

Bearded Collie (12.3)

Bedlington Terrier (14.3)

Bernese Mountain Dog (7.0)

Border Collie (13.0)

Border Terrier (13.8)

Boxer (10.4)

Bull Terrier (12.9)

Bulldog (6.7)

Bullmastiff (8.6)

Cairn Terrier (13.2)

Cavalier King Charles Spaniel (10.7)

Chihuahua (13.0)

Chow Chow (13.5)

Cocker Spaniel (12.5)

Corgi (11.3)

Dachshund (12.2)

Dalmatian (13.0)

Doberman Pinscher (9.8)

English Cocker Spaniel (11.8)

English Setter (11.2)

English Springer Spaniel (13.0)

English Toy Spaniel (10.1)

Flat-Coated Retriever (9.5)

German Shepherd (10.3)

German Shorthaired Pointer (12.3)

Golden Retriever (12.0)

Gordon Setter (11.3)

Great Dane (8.4)

Greyhound (13.2)

Irish Red and White Setter (12.9)

Irish Setter (11.8)

Irish Wolfhound (6.2)

Jack Russell Terrier (13.6)

Labrador Retriever (12.6)

Lurcher (12.6)

Miniature Dachshund (14.4)

Miniature Poodle (14.8)

Norfolk Terrier (10.0)

Old English Sheepdog (11.8)

Pekingese (13.3)

Random-bred / Mongrel (13.2)

Rhodesian Ridgeback (9.1)

Rottweiler (9.8)

Rough Collie (12.2)

Samoyed (11.0)

Scottish Deerhound (9.5)

Scottish Terrier (12.0)

Shetland Sheepdog (13.3)

Shih Tzu (13.4)

Staffordshire Bull Terrier (10.0)

Standard Poodle (12.0)

Tibetan Terrier (14.3)

Toy Poodle (14.4)

Viszla (12.5)

Weimaraner (10.0)

Welsh Springer Spaniel (11.5)

West Highland White Terrier (12.8)

Whippet (14.3)

Wire Fox Terrier (13.0)

Yorkshire Terrier (12.8)

Life expectancy of Humans:

Male (74.4)

Female (79.8)

So what you're saying here is that it would be ok to save a dachshund puppy over an 80 year old female stranger. I agree. Good research.

 

[Psychopav]

Can most dogs not swim? Every dog I have ever had has been a good swimmer....and you save the stranger.These people saying your pets "are like" your children are just kidding yourselves. The fact is, they ARE NOT your children and ARE NOT human. Get over it.

Although kids (esp. under 5) are like really smart pets.

 

[Smoo]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

 

[Punk]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

 

[Smoo]

Can most dogs not swim? Every dog I have ever had has been a good swimmer....and you save the stranger.These people saying your pets "are like" your children are just kidding yourselves. The fact is, they ARE NOT your children and ARE NOT human. Get over it.

Although kids (esp. under 5) are like really smart pets.

You obviously haven't spent much time around kids."Smart" is not a word that leaps to mind.

 

[Smoo]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human. And you still haven't answered the question.

 

[CrossEyed]

OK.  Good.  Now I know your just an imbecile.  And that's cool.  I'm not going to judge.  I just wanted to know so I can stop wasting time arguing.

Oh, how I love irony.

Once again, pointing out that my second language has some errors in its grammar usage and the fact that you are too proud and stubborn to admit that you are wrong are two totally different types of 'stupid'.

You call me an imbecile and then one sentence later say "I'm not going to judge". Then you criticize me for being too proud and stubborn to admit that I'm wrong based purely on the fact that you disagree with me.

Talk about being hypocritical.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human.

What about an amoeba?

 

[Psychopav]

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

I would save the dog. 20 innocent lives > 1 guilty life. Although that's just my opinion and it isn't OBVIOUS, like saving the stranger in the scenario laid out in the first post.

 

[Psychopav]

Can most dogs not swim?  Every dog I have ever had has been a good swimmer....and you save the stranger.These people saying your pets "are like" your children are just kidding yourselves. The fact is, they ARE NOT your children and ARE NOT human.  Get over it.

Although kids (esp. under 5) are like really smart pets.

You obviously haven't spent much time around kids."Smart" is not a word that leaps to mind.

lol

 

[Psychopav]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human. And you still haven't answered the question.

Says who?

 

[Grackle Squad]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

I've been asking the same thing (also with no response). I'll reiterate for those that wandered in in the middle (coughCrossEyedcough). Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision? What if the dog is really God, and it just looks like a dog? What if dogs are really supposed to be higher forms of life, but somebody long ago decided that they are here to serve us and they have just gone along with it. What if they are really smarter than we think they are, and they are running everything. Is it too preposterous to think that maybe you don't know everything?

 

[Politician Spock]

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

I would save the dog. 20 innocent lives > 1 guilty life. Although that's just my opinion and it isn't OBVIOUS, like saving the stranger in the scenario laid out in the first post.

What is the 80 year old homeless drunk guilty of?

 

[CrossEyed]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are....and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

ALWAYS.

20 more kids will probably die, but at least the 80 year old homeless drunk is safe.

So you are going to criticize me based on a completely ridiculous fictitious scenario? How could you possibly know that the dog "knows" where the kids are? The answer is that you couldn't. And once again, the human being's life is more valuable than the dog's.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

I've been asking the same thing (also with no response). I'll reiterate for those that wandered in in the middle (coughCrossEyedcough). Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision? What if the dog is really God, and it just looks like a dog? What if dogs are really supposed to be higher forms of life, but somebody long ago decided that they are here to serve us and they have just gone along with it. What if they are really smarter than we think they are, and they are running everything. Is it too preposterous to think that maybe you don't know everything?

You're saying that, but I don't believe that's how you really feel. Do you think people should go to jail for killing other humans? Do you think they should go to jail if they step on a bug?

 

[Punk]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human. And you still haven't answered the question.

as much right to live = more right to live than human? So, Does that mean it just comes down to personal preference?... to answer your question, a dog can't provide for a family the way the stranger may be able to. Instead of looking for the bad in everyone, maybe you should look for the good.

 

[Smoo]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human.

What about an amoeba?

Certainly.

 

[Psychopav]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

I've been asking the same thing (also with no response). I'll reiterate for those that wandered in in the middle (coughCrossEyedcough). Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision? What if the dog is really God, and it just looks like a dog? What if dogs are really supposed to be higher forms of life, but somebody long ago decided that they are here to serve us and they have just gone along with it. What if they are really smarter than we think they are, and they are running everything. Is it too preposterous to think that maybe you don't know everything?

Is it too preposterous to think that you might not? Why do you feel the need to criticize everyone who disagrees with you? Just because they disagree with you doesn't mean they think they know everything. It just means that in this one instance they think they're right and you're wrong.The dog isn't really god and isn't really running things. It's not really more intelligent than people.People really are more important than dogs.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human.

What about an amoeba?

Certainly.

Can you answer my question above about whether the punishment should be the same for killing any species?

 

[Smoo]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

Why isn't it?

Because a dog has as much right to live as a human. And you still haven't answered the question.

as much right to live = more right to live than human? So, Does that mean it just comes down to personal preference?... to answer your question, a dog can't provide for a family the way the stranger may be able to. Instead of looking for the bad in everyone, maybe you should look for the good.

The dog can provide for a dog family. Why is the dog's family less important than a human's family?

 

[Politician Spock]

The results of this poll are truly disturbing.  I can't believe that people would choose to save the life of an animal over the life of a human being.  The fact that almost half of you would choose the dog is a sad commentary on our society and the value it places (or doesn't place) on human life.

Have you been listening to the Dude's story?

You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a story. Do you admit that you have no frame of reference?

There was no story attached to the original post. It was a hypothetical situation. And I'll say it again. It's truly sad that anyone would save any animal over any human being.

"Ignorance of Big Lebowski quote on the defence. 10 yards and an automatic FIRST DOWN!"

YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR ELEMENT, DONNIE!

I really don't care what story or what quote anyone attaches to this question. It is morally reprehensible that someone would choose to save a dog over a human being.

How? Does that still apply if the person is a convicted killer who escaped from prison and was scheduled to die this year?

Always applies. Create any scenario you can think of. A human being's life is ALWAYS more valuable than the life of an animal.

What about a scenario where a man has killed 20 kids, and is holding 20 more kids hostage in a secret place, and the drowning dog is the only one other than the man who knows where the hostages are.

...and the guy drowning next to the dog is some 80 year homeless drunk.

ALWAYS.

20 more kids will probably die, but at least the 80 year old homeless drunk is safe.

So you are going to criticize me based on a completely ridiculous fictitious scenario? How could you possibly know that the dog "knows" where the kids are? The answer is that you couldn't. And once again, the human being's life is more valuable than the dog's.

Take a chill pill man. You said "Create any scenario you can think of." I just obliged.

 

[Grackle Squad]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

I've been asking the same thing (also with no response). I'll reiterate for those that wandered in in the middle (coughCrossEyedcough). Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision? What if the dog is really God, and it just looks like a dog? What if dogs are really supposed to be higher forms of life, but somebody long ago decided that they are here to serve us and they have just gone along with it. What if they are really smarter than we think they are, and they are running everything. Is it too preposterous to think that maybe you don't know everything?

You're saying that, but I don't believe that's how you really feel. Do you think people should go to jail for killing other humans? Do you think they should go to jail if they step on a bug?

How many times has this defense come up in this thread? "Those saying they would save the dog say that, but I don't think they really MEAN it."

 

[CrossEyed]

The fact is, they ARE NOT human.

This is what I've been asking and nobody will answer. Why is humanity vs caninity an issue?

I've been asking the same thing (also with no response). I'll reiterate for those that wandered in in the middle (coughCrossEyedcough). Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision? What if the dog is really God, and it just looks like a dog? What if dogs are really supposed to be higher forms of life, but somebody long ago decided that they are here to serve us and they have just gone along with it. What if they are really smarter than we think they are, and they are running everything. Is it too preposterous to think that maybe you don't know everything?

I'll refer you to Genesis chapter one. But since there is a good chance that you believe that we evolved from dogs, I guess that probably won't matter to you.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Then you criticize me for being too proud and stubborn to admit that I'm wrong based purely on the fact that you disagree with me.

At least you finally admitted you're wrong.Get thicker skin. I'm not calling you an imbecile in a hatred way (remember, I'm the guy who got your back when idiots wouldn't pray for you.) I'm saying it in a 'debating on the internet' kind of way.The point you're missing here is I'm not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is I do not believe that people should judge others for their decision. What you feel is right may not apply to everyone else using a broad paintbrush to paint black and white. That's all I'm getting at.

 

[Gringoloco]

Why are human beings so much better than dogs? Who has decided that, and why did they get to make that decision?

I bet you have.In your opinion, are dogs better than other animals? Better than other beloved pets? If so, why? If not, I'll go on.