• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Gestalt

The Fallen
Nov 10, 2017
499
Respect for having the courage to pull it off but if he died and left behind his three kids cause of a dog he'd be looking stupid as fuck right now. I understand that for a lot of people pets are members of the family too, and I believe that ideally they should always be treated that way, but when your kids are already safe..... I dunno man.
 

fanboi

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,702
Sweden
Perhaps.

They also might resent him for the rest of their lives, and never have a healthy relationship with him again.



I like to think I'd take the risk in a heartbeat, and that's me sitting here thinking it through. In the heat of the moment it would just be instinctual.

Also, it is a gotcha. Any time you're asking someone to choose which of their family members to kill it's a goddamn gotcha. That's a ridiculous scenario that has no good answers. It's also irreverent to the discussion at hand, since this wasn't a father choosing between the life of his dog and his kids. His kids were already safe. This was a father choosing between risking his own life to try and save the family dog or letting that family member literally die in a fire.

Dude is a hero.

If they resent him for not risking his life for a pet, it have to be to underlying issues.
 

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
What if the dog dies and your kid gets depressed and its forever hurt by that?

What if the dog dies and your kid gets depressed and you divorce your partner because of that and all your children live without two parents anyway?

What if the dog dies and the kid doesn't give a shit?

What if the dogs dies and the kid is happy?

What if, what if, what if?

You're assuming an awful lot of things from your own prospective for an action, made by another person, that's totally emotional and not rational.

I work in a school. I can tell you that due to a pets lifespan, kids losing pets it quite normal and not comparable to losing a parent.
 

spineduke

Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
8,754
I truly hope the way you post here is thoroughly divorced from the manner in which you conduct yourself in your everyday life, because the idea of someone so emotionally stunted and so devoid of self-reflection offering guidance to people at their most vulnerable is terrifying.

You apparently led a life in which the animals you interacted with endured a harsh, brutal existence. Those animals' lives and your perspective on them are no more or less authentic than the lives of domestic pets and the families who love them. So stop lecturing people with your sophomoric philosophy, because having an uncommon life experience does not mean you automatically have some truer insight into the nature of morality.

we're talking about a man risking his life and potentially destroying a family, its possible to recognize his bravery, and his sheer irresponsability.
 

EloquentM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,631
If your children resent you for the rest of your life for not risking your life for saving the family dog, please go to an MFT.
 

MajesticSoup

Banned
Feb 22, 2019
1,935
We could always ask a firefighter if entering a house on fire, in which you don't actually know where the fire started is a rational decision, as opposed to a guy who got lucky.
The fire started from the house next door. The dog was in a room that wasnt on fire.
Other scenario: guy sees everything on fire, and nopes right the fuck out.
 

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
I like to think I'd take the risk in a heartbeat, and that's me sitting here thinking it through. In the heat of the moment it would just be instinctual.

Also, it is a gotcha. Any time you're asking someone to choose which of their family members to kill it's a goddamn gotcha. That's a ridiculous scenario that has no good answers. It's also irreverent to the discussion at hand, since this wasn't a father choosing between the life of his dog or the lives of his kids. His kids were already safe. This was a father choosing between risking his own life to try and save the family dog or letting that family member literally die in a fire.

Dude is a hero.

The scenario isn't irrelevant to the discussion as it's a responce to those who can't seem to differentiate between the value of life between a family member and a pet.

On the other hand, I just saw someone bringing up women and immigrants as less valuable in the eyes of the law as an apt comparison to animals so I have no idea where this discussion is going.

The fire started from the house next door. The dog was in a room that wasnt on fire.
Other scenario: guy sees everything on fire, and nopes right the fuck out.

Except the guy couldn't have known which rooms where on fire when he entered the house.
 
Last edited:

MrCibb

Member
Dec 12, 2018
5,349
UK
A stupid, dangerous decision but yeah, I'd probably try to save my dog too if I could, so respect to this dude. Pets can become a big part of your life, it's not so easy to sit back and know they're dying. If I went in my dog would probably bite me when I picked him up and I'd have to tell him off. Then I'd need to send him outside for a time out before letting him back in to apologize. Hopefully all this would be done before the house finishes burning down.
 

Terminus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,874
All of your posts in this thread are incredibly facile. "Your own kids = a dog because molecules and love"

If your definition of facile is "respect for and desire to protect life that doesn't stop at arbitrary tribal boundaries for no good reason" then you're quite right.

But more than that, the dog was facing mortal danger because he put it there. Regardless of how you feel about proactively protecting animal life, you have a responsibility to address the consequences of your decisions. He knew exactly where the dog was, knew he could get in and out in a manner of seconds, and he did so. This man did not a damn thing wrong.
 

EloquentM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,631
If your definition of facile is "respect for and desire to protect life that doesn't stop at arbitrary tribal boundaries for no good reason" then you're quite right.
Lol at "no good reason"

Reason: high potential for your 3 kids and wife to go on without a father/husband. Do y'all not understand how fire in burning houses works? Low visibility, low oxygen, high heat. Paths often collapse within seconds. You pass out from smoke within seconds and are burned alive.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,948
So we're assuming hes stupid, and that hes a dead beat dad who doesnt think of his kids.

Naw, I think most people think he was in a terrible situation and made a snap judgement to save something they cared about. People have died to save a laptop with important work on it. People aren't exactly thinking rationally a lot of the time in emergency situations. Most people in emergency services understand that your average person isn't capable of rational thought when their entire life is literally burning to the ground.

I don't know about others, but I can't fault the guy for doing it, but it was an irrational and stupid thing to do when it risks doing insane damage to your young children and putting the lives of other emergency personnel in danger.

My only tip is to make a fire plan and practice it. I literally have a plan that involves saving my cats if there was a house fire, but my kids need their father more than they need they cats.
 

Ragnorok64

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
2,955
You understand that "reasonable" is a totally subjective way of judging things, right?



No shit.

Still doesn't put one above the other.



And it doesn't prove anything at all. In the past minorities and women weren't the same for the law. Was it reasonable to think their life was less important at the time, then?
I never imagined valuing fellow human lives higher than animals would be a bridge too far for people to consider reasonable but here we are.

What?! Minorities and women are humans, they deserve human rights. You can't compare the injustices done to humans and struggles for civil rights through history, to animals. Are you out of your mind?
 

Aeferis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,626
Italy
It is quite common that losing a parent is a big trauma in younger years.

Losing a pet isn't, normally.

So what? You google those data before deciding what to do? You act instinctively because any scenario could potentially lead to nefarious consequences and you don't want that for your kid no matter how less probable that is.

The death of a dog in a house fire, in particular instances, could lead to serious problem that could change a person's life forever, what if that's what happens to your kid because you didn't save the dog? Would you feel less shitty because you acted responsibly and looked for statistics?

Or, let put this in another way, would you throw your kid out the window of a burning building because you think that dying due to the fire is more likely? Maybe you will or maybe you won't, but both scenarios could lead to good or bad results no matter how positive and responsible your intentions were at the start.

I think it's really pointless to try to draw a general rule of what's the right thing to do in emotionally stressful situations. You may end up being disappointed by the result.
 
Last edited:

leafcutter

Member
Feb 14, 2018
1,219
If your definition of facile is "respect for and desire to protect life that doesn't stop at arbitrary tribal boundaries for no good reason" then you're quite right.

But more than that, the dog was facing mortal danger because he put it there. Regardless of how you feel about proactively protecting animal life, you have a responsibility to address the consequences of your decisions. He knew exactly where the dog was, knew he could get in and out in a manner of seconds, and he did so. This man did not a damn thing wrong.

His responsibility is to raise his kids, full stop. And thanks for confirming my point with the "no good reason" line.
 

EloquentM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,631
I never imagined valuing fellow human lives higher than animals would be a bridge too far for people to consider reasonable but here we are.

What?! Minorities and women are humans, they deserve human rights. You can't compare the injustices done to humans and struggles for civil rights through history, to animals. Are you out of your mind?
People been getting passes for their awful takes and insults in this thread over animals that don't even know we're arguing about them. We're supposedly the worst people in existence because we don't agree that a pets life equals a humans life in an emergency situation, and apparently we hate all animals and have never had any. We're borderline sociopaths lmao.
 

Aeferis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,626
Italy
What?! Minorities and women are humans, they deserve human rights. You can't compare the injustices done to humans and struggles for civil rights through history, to animals. Are you out of your mind?

That's not what I meant and you know it (you can't use laws to judge what's morally responsible because they fucking change) but, since you asked, yes I can. Because to you that means devaluing one, to me it means valuing both at the same high value.

Also, I'll be the one assuming shit here since everyone's doing that, but I tend to believe that if you don't save one's dog, you won't save another human either if it means risking your own life.
 
Last edited:

spineduke

Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
8,754
People been getting passes for their awful takes and insults in this thread over animals that don't even know we're arguing about them. We're supposedly the worst people in existence because we don't agree that a pets life equals a humans life in an emergency situation, and apparently we hate all animals and have never had any. We're borderline sociopaths lmao.

pretty amazed at how patient every person who's taken issue with this mans actions have been, all the while feathering the insults and threats to ignore.
 

Maneil99

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,252
I never imagined valuing fellow human lives higher than animals would be a bridge too far for people to consider reasonable but here we are.

What?! Minorities and women are humans, they deserve human rights. You can't compare the injustices done to humans and struggles for civil rights through history, to animals. Are you out of your mind?
The fact that you find it so surprising that people value animal life the same as human might indicate why you are having issues with why people are not agreeing with you.

This guy chained his dog to the toilet. It would have been a gruesome and guilt heavy death. He made that choice to go and save it. You can act morally superior or lecture him all you want. It's not your place.
 

Terminus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,874
His responsibility is to raise his kids, full stop. And thanks for confirming my point with the "no good reason" line.

"No good reason" refers to people making a distinction in principle by drawing a line between human life and animal life, not to the specific circumstances of this case. But if you or anyone else would care to lay out an ethical treatise demonstrating the greater inherent value of human life as opposed to that of a dog, or any other organism with the capacity to apprehend the world around them, I'm all ears.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,948
pretty amazed at how patient every person who's taken issue with this mans actions have been, all the while feathering the insults and threats to ignore.

Considering I've probably been reported a hundred times in this thread, you have to be extremely careful. I gaurantee if I told someone to fuck off or called them a monster, I'd have been catapulted into orbit by now. Animal threads are usually the most heated on this forum.
 

Maneil99

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,252
Anyone that wants to justify human life over animal life can do so, I have no issues with differing opinions. But thats not even what happened here. It's literally whataboutism.
 

Deleted member 5334

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,815
So, let me put it into perspective to some people. As someone who lost a dog due to unfortunate circumstances here. I'll make it clear right now: A Dog, or any animal, I feel is on equal footing to any human. And it's incredibly difficult for me to say I'd choose a dog or a child, as to me: They're both family and they both would mean as much to me.

I was about... 5, I wanna say. I had a dog, her name was Molly. She was a Black Lab mix, and we had her for about... 5-6 months. She never quite fully grew out of a lot of puppy habits (and was super destructive, which we were still working on months in, but Labs are notorious for this). But despite this, we loved her dearly, especially me. I always brought her into my room to sleep with me as a kid. She'd stay for awhile.

Anyways, one night, my dad was outside, talking with our neighbor. Their dog was also outside. Well, I went inside to get something to drink and join my father outside. Well, like usual, being as sneaky as she is, she bolted out the door. Unfortunately, both dogs, due to a slight hole in the fence, got out and they both ran off. The neighbor was able to get their dog back, but Molly....? Unfortunately, not so much. My dad and a couple neighbors went out looking for her.

After a little bit, I decided to go out and see if they found her. As I was nearing the corner, I saw her. I yelled at her name, excited, and ran towards her. She thought she was playing a game, and.... She ran into the street and got hit by the care. She died on impact. To make matters worse, the person who hit the dog, was someone from the human society. Which is like... yeah...

Anyways, I remember freaking out, begging my mom, to get her to an ambulance. And she said that won't do any good. Later in the night, when we all got in... Both my parents, cried really hard. My sisters to some degree, also blamed me for her loss. Realistically, although I was only 5, I still blame myself.

To this day, I still think about her. What kinda life she could've had had that not have happened. If I had known better, I wouldn't have gone outside with her in the Kitchen. I wouldn't have ran after her. I have so many regrets. I'm 29, but this still is burned into my mind.

I feel like, people don't give credit to children a lot for losing pets. Especially if they were lost for horrific reasons, like mine was. They feel trauma. They feel regret. They feel sorrow. And it can leave a long lasting scar in the back of their minds. Especially if somehow the kids actions lead up to it. I feel it's absolutely heartless to say kids wouldn't take the loss of a pet nearly as much as their parent. I absolutely did.

In fact, even as an adult, when we had to put down our second dog, Dallas, for health reasons (he suddenly gotten worse), I cried. I cried a lot. I screamed. And honestly, there's random nights where I think about him and I cry. Same with three of my grand parents from time to time, my buddy Cody (as you guys may know as PolygonJim/Jimmy), and an old online buddy of mine, Tebian.

I care about everyone, and every animal, as equal.

I don't think that is delusional.

I will say this: I agree that it'd be awful for the kids to have lost their father as a result of this, but... On the flip side, given my experiences with losing a pet, as a child, who's the say the lasting effects wouldn't be the same? For me, certainly was.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,948
Anyone that wants to justify human life over animal life can do so, I have no issues with differing opinions. But thats not even what happened here. It's literally whataboutism.

Right now we're in that area, yeah, but the conversation just sort of went that way. I think people are just trying to explain where they're coming from in the face of pretty sharp rebuke.
 

Man God

Member
Oct 25, 2017
38,306
In what was possibly my brother's finest moment he did just this for his three cats last February. Very proud of him for that as a cat person myself.
 

EloquentM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,631
Anyone that wants to justify human life over animal life can do so, I have no issues with differing opinions. But thats not even what happened here. It's literally whataboutism.
It's literally not whataboutism. No one but the opposition is asserting differing issues attempting to subvert from the actual issue with a completely different subject (comparing animals to minorities).

The issue is, is it irresponsible of a husband and father of three risk his life to save his dogs life?

and yes, objectively speaking his choice is irresponsible and irrational, and most altruistic choices are which is why we praise them when they succeed, but it also speaks to the hypocrisy that had this man died, people would not be praising him, and we'd likely would not even have seen the story if he died.

Regardless, just because you make a stupid decision and get lucky doesn't automatically make the decision any less stupid. It's fine to have emotional attachments to animals, but I think it is morally questionable and considerably naive to consider your own children and your dog on equal footing.
 

Terminus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,874
Anyone that wants to justify human life over animal life can do so, I have no issues with differing opinions. But thats not even what happened here. It's literally whataboutism.

It's the crux of the issue. No one would be complaining if he had gone in to rescue a person. The fundamental disagreement people have with his actions is rooted in the fact that they don't value the dog's life as highly, full stop.
 

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
Right now we're in that area, yeah, but the conversation just sort of went that way. I think people are just trying to explain where they're coming from in the face of pretty sharp rebuke.

You work on a farm, you see animals behaving like animals every single day. You treat animals as animals. I can see where you're coming from.

I can't see where someone who can ''compare the injustices done to humans and struggles for civil rights through history to animals'' is coming from.

This shouldn't even be a discussion.
 

Maneil99

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,252
It's literally not whataboutism. No one but the opposition is asserting differing issues attempting to subvert from the actual issue with a completely different subject (comparing animals to minorities).

The issue is, is it irresponsible of a husband and father of three risk his life to save his dogs life?

and yes, objectively speaking his choice is irresponsible and irrational, and most altruistic choices are which is why we praise them when they succeed, but it also speaks to the hypocrisy that had this man died, people would not be praising him, and we'd likely would not even have seen the story if he died.

Regardless, just because you make a stupid decision and get lucky doesn't automatically make the decision any less stupid. It's fine to have emotional attachments to animals, but I think it is morally questionable and considerably naive to consider your own children and your dog on equal footing.
It's also stupid to chain your dog to a toilet for situations just like this. It's just as much his responsibility to give that dog a chance to live.
 

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
Oct 25, 2017
6,948
So, let me put it into perspective to some people. As someone who lost a dog due to unfortunate circumstances here. I'll make it clear right now: A Dog, or any animal, I feel is on equal footing to any human. And it's incredibly difficult for me to say I'd choose a dog or a child, as to me: They're both family and they both would mean as much to me.

I was about... 5, I wanna say. I had a dog, her name was Molly. She was a Black Lab mix, and we had her for about... 5-6 months. She never quite fully grew out of a lot of puppy habits (and was super destructive, which we were still working on months in, but Labs are notorious for this). But despite this, we loved her dearly, especially me. I always brought her into my room to sleep with me as a kid. She'd stay for awhile.

Anyways, one night, my dad was outside, talking with our neighbor. Their dog was also outside. Well, I went inside to get something to drink and join my father outside. Well, like usual, being as sneaky as she is, she bolted out the door. Unfortunately, both dogs, due to a slight hole in the fence, got out and they both ran off. The neighbor was able to get their dog back, but Molly....? Unfortunately, not so much. My dad and a couple neighbors went out looking for her.

After a little bit, I decided to go out and see if they found her. As I was nearing the corner, I saw her. I yelled at her name, excited, and ran towards her. She thought she was playing a game, and.... She ran into the street and got hit by the care. She died on impact. To make matters worse, the person who hit the dog, was someone from the human society. Which is like... yeah...

Anyways, I remember freaking out, begging my mom, to get her to an ambulance. And she said that won't do any good. Later in the night, when we all got in... Both my parents, cried really hard. My sisters to some degree, also blamed me for her loss. Realistically, although I was only 5, I still blame myself.

To this day, I still think about her. What kinda life she could've had had that not have happened. If I had known better, I wouldn't have gone outside with her in the Kitchen. I wouldn't have ran after her. I have so many regrets. I'm 29, but this still is burned into my mind.

I feel like, people don't give credit to children a lot for losing pets. Especially if they were lost for horrific reasons, like mine was. They feel trauma. They feel regret. They feel sorrow. And it can leave a long lasting scar in the back of their minds. Especially if somehow the kids actions lead up to it. I feel it's absolutely heartless to say kids wouldn't take the loss of a pet nearly as much as their parent. I absolutely did.

In fact, even as an adult, when we had to put down our second dog, Dallas, for health reasons (he suddenly gotten worse), I cried. I cried a lot. I screamed. And honestly, there's random nights where I think about him and I cry. Same with three of my grand parents from time to time, my buddy Cody (as you guys may know as PolygonJim/Jimmy), and an old online buddy of mine, Tebian.

I care about everyone, and every animal, as equal.

I don't think that is delusional.

I will say this: I agree that it'd be awful for the kids to have lost their father as a result of this, but... On the flip side, given my experiences with losing a pet, as a child, who's the say the lasting effects wouldn't be the same? For me, certainly was.

That's certainly traumatic and I'm very sorry you've gone through this. All I can say is that a child's father (assuming they're a good parent) is a huge part in the development and well-being of a child. Your dog, while very important, can't earn a living to take care of your physical needs. He wouldn't have been able to teach you how to do math, or be there on your wedding day. Couldn't help you take care of your children or give them the support they need. Couldn't tuck you in to bed and read you story before bed. Couldn't help you decide where to go to college or give you advice after a bad breakup. Couldn't help shoulder the burden and the grief of a parent having to raise three children alone. Couldn't have supported you for 30-50 more years.

Death is traumatic no matter where it's from. Again, what you went through is terrible and I'm sorry you've had to carry this guilt and sorrow for so long. It's truly horrific. I will say, as someone who works with children who have no parents or those that have abused them, there is literally nothing on this planet more important than a child's parents. I spend almost every day knee deep in the failings of us as a species and it breaks my heart. A kid's entire future well-being hinges on the people who are supposed to care for them, even if they never met that person. I mean that with 100% conviction. Those children will be on this planet for possibly 80+ years with untold number of personal connections. They deserve to have their father for as long as possible.
 

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
I can compare humans to animals. The "and struggles for civil rights" argument was addressed in the first part of my post.

Yeah, the part you edited in. Nevertheless, you then went on to clarify that (even if it wasn't what you initially meant) you can compare their struggles.

since you asked, yes I can
 

____

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,734
Miami, FL
Lolsmh at putting your life at risk like that as a father and thinking it's okay.

Some of y'all are scary as fuck and I'm happy people in life are allowed to have different mindsets because wow.
 

EloquentM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,631
The reason the comment with civil rights is being backtracked is because you can't compare humans lives to animals lives in this way, and ironically enough throughout human history humans have been enslaved and treated worse than animals, so just a fun conversation all around.
 

Aeferis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,626
Italy
Yeah, the part you edited in

Yep, I edited that in. About half an hour ago (any mod could check that). Exactly because I knew someone would try to turn what I said as they pleased, just like you did.

The reason the comment with civil rights is being backtracked is because you can't compare humans lives to animals lives in this way, and ironically enough throughout human history humans have been enslaved and treated worse than animals, so just a fun conversation all around.

Hey, guess what? I never did compare those.

I replied to a user who said they were right because "the law says so" that you can't use laws to pick what's morally and ethically right because laws change, as the fact that minorities and women were once different by law proves. You can turn that into comparing whatever you want with whatever you want, it doesn't change what I actually said.
 
Last edited:

Kronvilt

Member
Oct 28, 2017
132
Yep, I edited that in. About half an hour ago (any mod could check that). Exactly because I knew someone would try to turn what I said as they pleased, just like you did.

...

That's not what I meant and you know it (you can't use laws to judge what's morally responsible because they fucking change) but, since you asked, yes I can. Because to you that means devaluing one, to me it means valuing both at the same high value.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and trust that it wasn't what you ment. Even so, you went on to say that you could in the very same sentence.

That's what you're doing in the bolded part. You first say that wasn't what you did, but then clarify that you could. It's there for everyone to see.

The reason the comment with civil rights is being backtracked is because you can't compare humans lives to animals lives in this way, and ironically enough throughout human history humans have been enslaved and treated worse than animals, so just a fun conversation all around.

Yeah. I think I'm wasting my time.
 

Terminus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,874
Yeah, the part you edited in. Nevertheless, you then went on to clarify that (even if it wasn't what you initially meant) you can compare their struggles.

since you asked, yes I can

That's great, you totally "got" them. Now do you have a response to the actual point they were making, namely that looking to the law for moral guidance is myopic and foolhardy, as the long history of bitter, morally justified struggles for equality by those the law has deemed "less than" shows?

If you don't think the future is one of greater respect for and legal protection of animal rights, you're just simply wrong.