That's because they're stupid animals who lack the intelligence to be moral agents - who are worthy of having rights, have the ability to act righteously or viciously, and have intrinsic worth.
Are dogs better than people?
- Thread starter Disgustipated
- Start date
That's because they're stupid animals who lack the intelligence to be moral agents - who are worthy of having rights, have the ability to act righteously or viciously, and have intrinsic worth.
Narz
keeping it real
Obviously a dog is worth more than a child molester so I'd save the dog.
I'd save a cat over a molester or murdered too. Or, if there was no pet inside, I'd save no one.
I'd save a cat over a molester or murdered too. Or, if there was no pet inside, I'd save no one.
Of course not. A child molester is a human. A dog is property. It is ethically equivalent to a chair.
Narz
keeping it real
I'd save a chair over a child molester too. I wouldn't put a child molester very high in the ethical category.
Consider dogs have saved humans from disaster & create positive feelings in humans I'd rate them much more highly than a chair (except annoying little yippy dogs).
I judge all creatures on a case by case basis.
A dog & a chair having nearly nothing in common except in the mind of an obsessive catagorizer.
a child molester/murderer can repent his wicked ways, an act of mercy such as this could be the catalyst for the change
kristopherb
Protective/Charismatic
The question is, why is the dog and the childmolester in the same burning building?
UnendingRequiem
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 40
A child molester? Shoot the bastard.
Narz
keeping it real
It could but I don't think I'd play the odds.
Dogs are mostly harmless whereas people are capable of being good or bad. I'd rather save a neutral animal than a bad person.
Disgustipated
Deity
How is that psychotic? I believe the value of the life of a dog (except maybe attack dogs that hurt people) is more than that of some humans such as murderers and child molesters. And in response to an above comment, I don't believe child molesters can ever reform. They have a high rate of repeat offenses.
As for other questions in this thread. Let's just assume there is no danger to yourself as long as you save only one. Because after then there will be too much smoke, and you know you'll die of smoke inhalation if you go back in. The child molester is known because you saw his face on the news, and heard that he was paroled and released from prison. The dog is just an average dog, you don't know his history, but can tell he's someone's pet.
As an additional scenario. Would you save the dog if you knew he was the pet of the child molester?
And a dog isn't the equivalent of a chair. I'm sure that's just trolling. If you think that, then you think it's perfectly acceptable to beat a dog. We have animal abuse laws in this country for a reason. A dog is capable of pain, and dogs do have some simple emotions. It's inhumane to hurt a dog.
As for other questions in this thread. Let's just assume there is no danger to yourself as long as you save only one. Because after then there will be too much smoke, and you know you'll die of smoke inhalation if you go back in. The child molester is known because you saw his face on the news, and heard that he was paroled and released from prison. The dog is just an average dog, you don't know his history, but can tell he's someone's pet.
As an additional scenario. Would you save the dog if you knew he was the pet of the child molester?
And a dog isn't the equivalent of a chair. I'm sure that's just trolling. If you think that, then you think it's perfectly acceptable to beat a dog. We have animal abuse laws in this country for a reason. A dog is capable of pain, and dogs do have some simple emotions. It's inhumane to hurt a dog.
Narz
keeping it real
Nicely put Disgustipated.
warpus
In pork I trust
I'm not sure. What if the dog is racist or something?
I'm not sure if that's possible.
Narz
keeping it real
Well technically dogs have been bred to be racist. In slave huntings I think.
But the argument that all humans > dogs is fundamentally idiotic because if humanity is the ultimate good than a person who is willing to destroy the lives of (multiple) humans cancels himself out. The only reason to value a mass murderer over a dog is misanthropy.
Anyway, we're not talking about actively killing anyone but saving them. Probably most would be too cowardly to save either. I doubt I would run into a burning building to save a dog.
But the argument that all humans > dogs is fundamentally idiotic because if humanity is the ultimate good than a person who is willing to destroy the lives of (multiple) humans cancels himself out. The only reason to value a mass murderer over a dog is misanthropy.
Anyway, we're not talking about actively killing anyone but saving them. Probably most would be too cowardly to save either. I doubt I would run into a burning building to save a dog.
NickyJ
Retired Narrator
For the rest of your post, very nicely put.
I agree completely. For the additional scenario, I'd still save the dog. The dog is innocent, the molester, nope. And since it's the pet of that molester, I guess the dog just got a new home when I rescued him.
Supr49er
2011 Thunderfall Cup
I'd save the dog, assuming I knew the person was a Pedo.
oagersnap
Emperor
That argument only holds if you assume that most murderers will go on to murder more people, which is not the case. I am quite shocked by the hatred that some people here express. Is it really so hard to believe that people can change?
No, it's true, people CAN change. Howeverr, they odds are that they will not. I'd probably go on a case by case basis, in normal situations saving the human if I had to choose. I do admit to bigotry, I wouldn't save a pit bull.
It's important to realize dogs don't have ethics. If he does something bad, he doesn't feel guilty, he feels bad that you're mad at him. That said, they are more loyal than most people because that's their nature.
Narz
keeping it real
Hatred? Because they are stating their opinion, only one person I noticed expressed what could be dubbed that (UnendingRequiem). Seriously though, be realistic, most of us wouldn't rescue anyone from a burning building. I know I probably wouldn't (especially now that I have a daughter).
I have basic human compassion for almost all human beings (though I particular despise sexual abusers since my ex was molested as a child & another girl I dated was raped). Many of them were abused themselves but then again so were many people who did not go on to be abusers themselves.
If you don't hurt anyone in this life you're neutral. If you abuse people you're below neutral. Remember the majority of people failed the Milgram experiment. That's +1 over dogs. However, many who do survive life threatening disasters do get a new lease on life & become better people. So that's +1 for humans. Also humans ususally have others who care about them. So that's +2.
So for your average Joe I'd choose him over the dog (if there was minimal chance I'd die in the rescue). For a molester or murderer, I'd go with the dog (though I wouldn't risk any chance of serious injury for a dog).
rugbyLEAGUEfan
Deity
There is no question that my dog will more readily bark at Asians walking pass the front gate than people of non Asian appearance
Likewise white fluffy dogs are are more likely to get an earful as they walk pass
Similar threads
