Okay, twice I've been summoned to this
thread, even though I really want to be done with it.
First off to the person who told me to "get out more" well, finding out that about 40% of strangers (to me) would save their pet's life over a stranger's is not EXACTLY an incentive, although I will be getting out more soon to do something I enjoy work wise and won't be on here as much. That will be helping sick children and their families in a rural county. I'm excited.
As far as the why, I could write a dissertation on the topic, including things like moral, religious and philosophical texts, etc. I could cite the increasing poverty and decreasing education levels of our youth. I could cite the shrinking community resources and the spread of families, and the increasing self gratification of our culture, and how it makes me sad to feel that strangers are somehow less important than animals for whatever reason.
I will give an example that I think shows an increase in my own moral reasoning. I was very ANTI giving homeless persons money. I would offer to
buy them food, I would offer to drive them to a shelter, I support shelters, but I did not want to support "addiction." Me and my mom went somewhere sometime and a homeless person asked my mother for a dollar. She gave the homeless person one (as she always did) and I asked her "Why," she did it. She just turned and looked at me and said, "Anna, I understand your reasoning. However, if a person is in desperate enough straits to ask me for a dollar, and I HAVE one, I am not going to say no." It was a completely DIFFERNT perspective and moral reasoning that (in my opinion when I considered it) was actually superior to my own. Because, in that moment, that dollar bill meant MORE to the person than my offers of "support" and it is NOT my job to evaluate what a person "should" or should not do. So, if asked, I will make those offers first, but if declined, I will give that person money as I'd rather give what I can, in essence hopefully providing the person what it is THEY desperately feel they need.
So, there's an example where I really did not condone an act, and in fact wound up emulating it.
I can't see a lot of moral reasoning on this thread, really more justifications. If you want to save your pet at the expense of a human being, do it. But, be honest, emotionally and otherwise. It's not about being sued, it's not about you and the pet's moral COMPACT it is pure and simple about greed and self interest,, which we ALL have in various areas of our life, and we should ALL man up and admit it. I do not and cannot find a moral justification for saving a pet over a stranger. Pets have shorter lives, they are less important to overall society (in fact often they are annoying, they are less evolved than people) almost all religious and moral philosophers would not advocate it. The only justification can and should be "Because I love my .pet more."
I have respect for that answer: "I understand it is immoral at worst, amoral at best, and most certainly SELFISH, but I LOVE my pet more, so go pound SAND Anna."
By the way, if I had to choose between my son's life versus FIFTEEN strangers, I would chose my son, every last damn time. I UNDERSTAND it is IMMORAL, it is WRONG, and I would be ruled PURLY by my own lizardy brain but at LEAST I could admit it.
That is what I mean by everyone's moral compass being different, by emotions ruling actions and everything else.
I will not, do not and have NEVER had an ANIMAL that I would consider saving over a human being but from the moment I became more engaged in society, more caring, more empathetic, etc., the less value I placed on animals, and the more value I placed on humanity in general. I grew up. I don't donate to animal shelters, I believe they SHOULD exist and every pet I've owned other than my son's dang ferret, was SCOOPED up in that way. If I get another dog, that is where I will get one. I believe pets deserve our love, our concern, our care, and the pleasure of one another's company but there is NO WAY I can make the leap to "No matter how much I love this animal I will kill a human over it." To me, relationships with animals can be wonderful, but they don't supersede murdering a human being over it, and the police officer who comes to take your statement will book you for manslaughter and incarcerate you, while your pet stays in a kill shelter and eventually dies, alone and unhappy.
We do not live in a society where the life of a pet is "morally prioritized" over manslaughter so be hypothetical all you want, but don't forget your hypothetical consequences.
And when I stand up and say, "I would save my son over 15 strangers," I also would be prepared to admit my fault, man up, do jail time, because that is MY moral blind spot.
I simply do not believe that one's personal love for an animal outweighs the life of a human being, and the fact that you are all so desperate to justify it tells me that YOU don't believe it EITHER. Not deep down inside where you aren't making illogical STATEMENTS about your pet and its WORTH,. It may be WORTH MORE TO YOU, but only to YOU, and that is an emotional judgement, not a moral one.
I did not understand until this thread how DEEPLY some folks get attached to their pets to the point of lack of sanity. Now that I do understand, I don't take issue with it, other than the fact that I am saddened that some people are so ALIENATED from society today (and it can be unpleasant, certainly) that they would not only make that choice but state millions of reasons of why it is a better choice instead of simply realizing that it is a BAD but VALID choice and they can stand up and say, "I care more about my cat who is barely sentient and doesn't love me at all, but I love IT and imbue it with human attributes, so I WILL save it," and then admit that it's a self centered, emotional choice.
I'm glad I'm moving rural soon for this job, because I think rural society does better with community. I hate it here, (Tucson) and have since the moment I got here. There is little community to speak of, and I am GLAD I am making the change, where resources are scarce enough that yeah, people have pets but don't treat them like their children.
And I freely admit that my lizardy choice to save my kid is bad, amoral and wrong, and I would deserve every consequence coming my way. What I would NOT do is talk about my deep emotional connection with my kid and how great he is (he is, but so are other people's kids) I would not attempt to claim the moral high ground, call myself a better "mother or human being" by making that choice. I would call myself self-serving, cruel, unable to make the ultimate GOOD choice, and I would turn myself in to the police.
Etc.
I don't think this discussion is cute, funny, oh so humanizing of pets or anything else. I really want to be done with it, quite honestly, and move on because it makes me sad. I think it's pathetic that we've gotten to the point that we value OUR pets (not pets mind you OUR PETS)over a stranger in the street. I have done my best to explain myself here, and I am saddened by my OWN moral compass concerning my OWN kid. We all have grey areas of morality.
it's the attempt to "make it right" that makes me sad. And if ALL of you felt 100% CONVINCED in your choice, you would not be repeatedly demanding I change my mind, prove my claim, explain myself, call me names, tacitly approve of YOUR choice, either. You would say, "Anna, I don't care what you think, you can go pound sand frankly, that's YOUR opinion, not mine."
But it's the "need" to somehow "make the choice okay" I find worrying. We are all capable of deep immorality from time to time. At least have the stones to admit it's amoral, and to live with yourself.
Because, yes, if this choice ever becomes NON fictional, you will indeed have to live with yourselves,, so please be very sure you CAN. When I considered my son I considered jails I would likely be incarcerated in (and I have visited) so you can be assured that I am ready for the consequences of my amoral choice, and what *I* then would have to live with. I wouldn't fight either, I would plead guilty because I WOULD BE guilty.
Can you please stop summoning me here? The very thought that I would need to somehow prove the "why" a human matters more than a dog or cat is depressing. That's an axiom as far as I'm concerned. At least until I read this thread. Do what you want. But be honest about it. There are people who are myopic about their pets, just as I am myopic about my kid, apparently, and there's no changing it. Just stop LYING to yourselves. You are being ruled by emotion, not logic. I get that we all do that. 40% seems HIGH to me, but then again who knows? I'm not Jesus, I'm not trying to be but I am also NOT the person saving our dog who will probably be dead in a couple years anyway over a HUMAN BEING.
No.
Anna
