ot: dogs are taking over

[Zeitgeist]

I am sure the people who responded lied. I think the percentages would be much higher than that. Most cat people would also choose their cat over most tourists. In fact, it would be interesting to see which tourists rated higher than other tourists.

[spdrun]

What airline do you fly for? I want to make sure to avoid it.

He flies for Con Air and Air America, don’cha know.

[scaredyclassic]

Well.

I give up.

I can’t discuss this. Your dog is replaceable. There are millions of other dogs out thrre. You’ll find another dog to love.

Each person us a unique universe in himsrlf.

Even a foreigner.

A dog!!!!
? A Goddamn dog!!!!

[joec]

The thing with the human vs. your dog is because your dog is yours and has a direct impact on your own life. Maybe the world has become a world of selfish bastards, but I’d say I’d do the same if it was something of mine. Heck, it could be my laptop probably and I could care less for the foreign tourist. My laptop gets destroyed, I’m now stuck with coming up with another 1-2k dollars to get a new one and I’m pissed. The tourist is gone, no affect at all on my well being or life, financially or emotionally.

You could say 300 million people from China could simply disappear and I doubt I’d bat an eye…Yes, it’s sad and I’m probably part of the 40% or part of the problem, but….

…people die everyday. Maybe I have a very harsh view of the world, but other people dieing that I don’t know has very little, if ANY impact of my life. Maybe it’s sad there was some earthquake in the Philippines and thousands of people died and all that, but I knew NONE of those people and my own selfish life wasn’t affected at all.

Overall, maybe it’s my general view of society or generally being a product of my environment now, tough life, rough times, etc…or me just being an asshole, who knows, but things that affect you simply has more value than things that don’t. Like trade 1 life you are close to for 2 billion in both China and India and most people would vote to probably get rid of the 2 bil…

They probably think those 2 counties took their jobs too to sweeten the pie…

None of this is that surprising IMO.

[FlyerInHi]

I will accept that a dog is propriety and not human.

But those hypothetical questions about either saving human lives or property are ridiculous. Ultimately things don’t work out like a movie cliffhanger where an either or choice has to be made in a split second.

In reality, the choices are often made in advance to expand resources to save property first then human lives later.

During a disaster, do you save property such as cultural artwork or do you allocate all resources to save human lives? There is a balance. The “priceless” property will be saved, I’m pretty sure. In the end many human lives will be lost. It’s just how it goes.

If you want to say that humans are fucked up, then yeah.

[Gunslinger]

This discussion reminds me of a joke I heard over the holidays. President walks into a Congressional Meeting and says we just killed 1/2 a million Iraqi’s and a beautiful blonde. The Majority leader stands up and asks “Mr President…why did we kill a beautiful blonde?” The President turns to the Secretary of State and whispers “See, I told you…..no one would care about the 1/2 million Iraqi’s”

[CDMA ENG]

Ironicly… Your dog, given the choice, would always chose you…

CE

[zk]

[quote=FlyerInHi]
If you want to say that humans are fucked up, then yeah.[/quote]

Some humans. Not all.

[Essbee]

This 40% discussion reminds me of a discussion that I had during college.

I was interested in signing up to be in the bone marrow registry.
My friend said that he would never sign up, because if he were a match, he wouldn’t want to donate. His reasoning was that it simply would not be worth his time to do so, even if he were potentially saving the life of another person. He would have no problem to donating to someone he knew, but if it were an unknown person, forget it.

This conversation REALLY bothered me as I had known him for several years and never would have guessed… It really changed my view of him forever.

[FlyerInHi]

The dog or foreign tourist question is sort of a bait.

Saving the dog first does not preclude saving a human.

If you save your dog first, maybe you have more strength to go on to save a human.

During wars and disasters people who are able to safeguard their families, property and survival can do a lot more good.

[CA renter]

[quote=zk][quote=FlyerInHi]I’d save my own dog over a foreign tourist. The key word is foreign, hence not one of us.[/quote]

A foreign tourist is not one of us, but a dog is?

On the one hand, it seems like you must be a troll because you can’t possibly be that fucked up.

On the other hand, survey says… 40%. Heck, you’re almost in the majority.

40% of the people who drive in cars on the same streets as us and who work with us and who…I guess, are our friends… are this fucked up.

This argument over Dahmer vs. a dog has kind of gotten us away from the foreign tourist vs. dog issue. Am I the only one who finds 40% an extremely scary number?[/quote]

You’re not the only one. It’s really incomprehensible. There are some crazy people out there.

[scaredyclassic]

A dog is not valuable property.

It has zero resale value.

A dog is actually a financial liability.

By saving your own dog you are losing money.

It is purely your own attachment feelings that are valued over the life of the foreign human.

This is what I am sickened by.

I guess I’m not done. Dog owners ime are not vegetarians or particularly animal lovers. They eat pigs and such. They just love the company. They like the way a dog makes them feel. They imagine the dog has a special irreplaceable love for them.

A love they’d likely sell out for a good steak on a regular schedule. I dispute the dog would save you. The dog would be easily distracted from the choice by a squirrel or meat. I’m not even sure a dependent dog slave can meaningfully be said to choose.

but there are other Goddamn dogs. And your dog will move on when u die. Vquickly. Unless you made him super neurotic with your extreme neediness and weird fussing over him. Your dog is a moral vacuum who would equally love an evil owner as a good owner, who would happily accept treats to be trained to rip human babies apart and eat them.

Indeed any loving family pet could be trained to bite and eat human flesh in less than one week.

The foreign tourist, probably not. At least for kibble. For this reason and many more, the dog dies.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CDMA ENG]Ironicly… Your dog, given the choice, would always chose you…

CE[/quote]

Your unfixed dog would pick a bitch in heat over your life in a nanosecond.

It’s just a bizarre delusion we have that our digs have a human like love for us.

Weird.

But cutting his balls off will at least get you a bit more attention since he won’t perpetually be thinking about humping…

[all]

[quote=zk]
“A recent paper by Richard Topolski at George Regents University and colleagues, published in the journal Anthrozoös, demonstrates this human involvement with pets to a startling extent…
40% of respondents, including 46% of women, voted to save their dog over a foreign tourist [when they could only save one].”
[/quote]

There is 46% chance that by saving a foreign female tourist you would be saving someone who would save their dog over you if you ever visit their domicile.

[FlyerInHi]

That professor’s study is like asking would you rather have a dog or contribute to end child hunger, if you had only one choice. Thankfully, we have many choices.

My own personal experience is that good dog owners are kinder people.

Also, aren’t humans eternally in search of feel good moments and flattery? All the better if a dog fulfills some of that.

[Author]

Posts