Current Events > Who would you save if you could only save one: Your dog or a small child?

(+) Yeah! (+)

@gmanthebest posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

gmanthebest posted...

Cal12 posted...

MuayThai85 posted...

LinksLiege posted...

If it's my person dog vs. some random kid I don't know, I'm picking the dog.

MuayThai85 posted...

Gotta say, if my daughter and someone's dog were both in a building that's on fire and they chose to save the dog and not my child, that person wouldn't be alive much longer. Same as in this scenario. I'll happily spend the rest of my life in jail while you spend the last moments of yours in agony.

Considering the kid might exhibit the same kind of psychotic behavior that you're showing if it's a genetic thing, probably for the best that those genes don't get passed down.

LOL I'm the psycho yet you're the one who would literally let a child die to save your dog. How about we both go see a psychologist together and see which of us they think is the actual psycho.

They are taught to think objectively and not to treat things personally so youre not going to get them to take your side. Adding in that you would murder someone who chose to save their dog over your kid would probably end up with you committed once they deep digger into your psyche.

No, he's the same one. Only a psycho saves a dog over a child.

41.61% of CE would do that tho

I'm sure no one is surprised that 41.61% of people who voted are psychopaths.

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Cal12 posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

Cal12 posted...

This scenario is completely ridiculous as both could be saved

nope

There is no way equal distance, equal speed and equal opportunity that you cant save both even if its head on rather than from one side of the street or the other. Your scenario literally dictates that.

Yes there is

Multiple posters have called you out on your shitty scenario.

Lol

Flopic
---

Mist_Turnips posted...

The only purpose these topics are ever made for is for nerds to make up a reason to call other psychos in an attempt to actually have one person in life they can try to look down on when they are used to being looked down on themselves.

This. It happens in every topic like this. It's happening in this very topic. Choosing your dog is kind of a selfish answer, but it doesn't make you a psycho, despite what armchair psychologists who took a community college psych 100 class might tell you
---

KingCrabCake posted...

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid

I mean, you're wrong, but ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
---

gmanthebest posted...

KingCrabCake posted...

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid

I mean, you're wrong, but ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

i mean

you're wrong
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

gmanthebest posted...

KingCrabCake posted...

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid

I mean, you're wrong, but ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

i mean

you're wrong

Nah. Anyone who would save an animal over a child is pretty messed up upstairs.
---

gmanthebest posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

gmanthebest posted...

KingCrabCake posted...

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid

I mean, you're wrong, but ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

i mean

you're wrong

Nah. Anyone who would save an animal over a child is pretty messed up upstairs.

way to oversimplify the case
---

gmanthebest posted...

Nah. Anyone who would save an animal over a child is pretty messed up upstairs.

It's funny because picking the one that the person has a strong emotional bond with is the natural, normal response, while being completely incapable of understanding how that love would be a factor kinda does indicate the possible presence of some sort of disorder.
---

gmanthebest posted...

KingCrabCake posted...

You're not a psychopath for voting to save loved one over a dumbass kid

I mean, you're wrong, but ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Not really. My dog is my family, he's a loved one. Idc about some dumb ass teenager who don't know how to cross the street properly.

So i mean you're wrong and you properly dont get enough sleep at night so you aren't at fault for being wrong. Get better sleeping habits so you can think better and make better decisions
---

@MuayThai85 I have a question

If you would kill someone for not saving your child, then the polar opposite must hold true if that person did save your child.

The (closest thing to) the opposite of ending a life is giving a life. So, by your logic of killing someone if they did not save your child, you must be prepared to essentially "give your life" to the person who saves your child. What that means logistically, I do not know. So I ask you, what would you do for / give to the person who decided to save your child over their dog?
---

It's ok, I guess. You guys are only thinking emotionally, rather than logically.
---

gmanthebest posted...

It's ok, I guess. You guys are only thinking emotionally, rather than logically.

just answered your own question then
---

gmanthebest posted...

It's ok, I guess. You guys are only thinking emotionally, rather than logically.

Youre not thinking at all tho
---

dog. not even a hard choice.
---

gmanthebest posted...

It's ok, I guess. You guys are only thinking emotionally, rather than logically.

Picking the dog is the more logical answer.

You're asking people to pick between an established good, the dog (which I doubtlessly care about), and a completely unknown variable, the kid. It's illogical to pick the unknown possible good (and we don't even know if it is good) over the known good.
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

@MuayThai85 I have a question

If you would kill someone for not saving your child, then the polar opposite must hold true if that person did save your child.

The (closest thing to) the opposite of ending a life is giving a life. So, by your logic of killing someone if they did not save your child, you must be prepared to essentially "give your life" to the person who saves your child. What that means logistically, I do not know. So I ask you, what would you do for / give to the person who decided to save your child over their dog?

Wut
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

MuayThai85 I have a question

If you would kill someone for not saving your child, then the polar opposite must hold true if that person did save your child.

The (closest thing to) the opposite of ending a life is giving a life. So, by your logic of killing someone if they did not save your child, you must be prepared to essentially "give your life" to the person who saves your child. What that means logistically, I do not know. So I ask you, what would you do for / give to the person who decided to save your child over their dog?

Wut

wut wut
---

There was an error posting your message:
To prevent flooding, no user can post more than 2 messages per minute. Please wait and try your post again in 60 seconds.
---