Poll of the Day > Your apartment is burning. You can only save ONE: Your dog, or a random baby.

(+) Yeah! (+)

The baby. Even if both parents die they're still alive. I can even become the adoptive daddy. Dogs, while cute, are replacable and can't perform algebra.

Plus I've only recently gotten over my fear of dogs. Someone I once knew had an untrained dog. He was a friendly fellow and everything, but getting tackled by a giant beast every time I tried to enter the house then having the owner side with the DOG... Fuck that. Even had to develop my own way of going up and down steps just to deal with it.
---

wwinterj25 posted...

dancer62 posted...

Babies are replaceable

So are you.

To a degree (no pun intended). It would take some time for the university to find someone to replace me.

OTOH, two idiot teenagers can start another urban blight baby to contribute to overpopulation in 10 minutes.
---

The smoke must have gotten to me already, because there is no baby at my apartment, and I have no dog. No one in my building does (as they're not allowed).

So I'll save myself instead.
---

wwinterj25 posted...

TheFalseDeity posted...

I view it as a loss to more people than the baby.

The way I'd see it is the baby has it's whole life ahead of it where as the parents/parent not as much. People being more connected to the parents is indeed true in most cases but by extension they probably would care for the baby too in some way. I doubt anyone would say to you that you shouldn't have saved the baby. Even more so if one of the parents survives anyway.

Yeah expecting the baby to have a longer future is the main thing id expect to cause people to do different than me. But as said before that doesnt mean as much to me as it seems to mean to others and i would act based on the way id want others to act if it were my family in that fire. At least i hope i would.
---

Yeah the only choice here is the baby. If you value the life of an animal that will likely only live on average 12-15 years over a human being then you have completely misaligned priorities.

Jen0125 posted...

Sand_Flare posted...

Whatever dipshit answers that they'd save their dog actually deserves to be the one to die in the fire.

i don't give a shit about some random person's baby, not sorry.

Is anyone at all surprised that Jen is highly immoral and selfish? We knew this already.

The dog.
---

My dog. The family will be happier in Heaven.
---

BeerOnTap posted...

Yeah the only choice here is the baby. If you value the life of an animal that will likely only live on average 12-15 years over a human being then you have completely misaligned priorities.

To most people, there pet in like their baby. Especially for people who dont have children.

Also, for the purpose of this scanario, the building collapses after you make it out. But to be honest, I probably wouldnt know that in real life. So Id probably save my dog at first while planning to go back in, but then couldnt, I guess...
---

dancer62 posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

dancer62 posted...

Babies are replaceable

So are you.

To a degree (no pun intended). It would take some time for the university to find someone to replace me.

OTOH, two idiot teenagers can start another urban blight baby to contribute to overpopulation in 10 minutes.

Really? Who's to say the baby isn't the next super-genius or major hero or something else? Heck, you could even adopt the baby and it would be as close as family. Maybe they ARE your replacement!

Also, 'contributing to overpopulation is kind of dependent on where you live. Somewhere like India or China might have an overpopulation issue, but Japan? That's an entirely different story. Heck, even in 'Murica I'd say the child would be much more of a boon due to slowing population growth.
---

Unbridled9 posted...

dancer62 posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

dancer62 posted...

Babies are replaceable

So are you.

To a degree (no pun intended). It would take some time for the university to find someone to replace me.

OTOH, two idiot teenagers can start another urban blight baby to contribute to overpopulation in 10 minutes.

Really? Who's to say the baby isn't the next super-genius or major hero or something else? Heck, you could even adopt the baby and it would be as close as family. Maybe they ARE your replacement!

Also, 'contributing to overpopulation is kind of dependent on where you live. Somewhere like India or China might have an overpopulation issue, but Japan? That's an entirely different story. Heck, even in 'Murica I'd say the child would be much more of a boon due to slowing population growth.

Ive notice you mention this twice, but I think theres a lot more to adopting a baby. I dont think its a finders keepers kinda deal. Tbh, most people who saved a baby probably wouldnt be able to keep it, I would think. Legally, at least.

Also, it could go both ways. (S)he couldve been the next genius/hero or the next villain, as well. And I dont think I want a random child as a replacement for my dog. I dont think you can just replace either of them. Not to mention, some people would possibly come to resent the baby that they saved only by giving up the life of their dog, who they actually cared about very much.
---

I love dogs and hate children but humans > animals almost every time

BeerOnTap posted...

Is anyone at all surprised that Jen is highly immoral and selfish? We knew this already.

It's not immoral to not save someone else's child over your dog. Selfish, sure. But you're being selfish expecting me to let my dog die for some baby I don't even know who is about as aware as my dog of the world around it. Don't talk to me about your morals because I don't care about them. You know nothing of mine.

I also find it ridiculous that out of every single person that said they'd pick their dog and even those who made similar comments to me you chose me to drag through the coals with your idiotic comment. Get a life.
---

LinkPizza posted...

Unbridled9 posted...

dancer62 posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

dancer62 posted...

Babies are replaceable

So are you.

To a degree (no pun intended). It would take some time for the university to find someone to replace me.

OTOH, two idiot teenagers can start another urban blight baby to contribute to overpopulation in 10 minutes.

Really? Who's to say the baby isn't the next super-genius or major hero or something else? Heck, you could even adopt the baby and it would be as close as family. Maybe they ARE your replacement!

Also, 'contributing to overpopulation is kind of dependent on where you live. Somewhere like India or China might have an overpopulation issue, but Japan? That's an entirely different story. Heck, even in 'Murica I'd say the child would be much more of a boon due to slowing population growth.

Ive notice you mention this twice, but I think theres a lot more to adopting a baby. I dont think its a finders keepers kinda deal. Tbh, most people who saved a baby probably wouldnt be able to keep it, I would think. Legally, at least.

Also, it could go both ways. (S)he couldve been the next genius/hero or the next villain, as well. And I dont think I want a random child as a replacement for my dog. I dont think you can just replace either of them. Not to mention, some people would possibly come to resent the baby that they saved only by giving up the life of their dog, who they actually cared about very much.

It depends. Typically you're right in that you can't just take a baby with you. However there's also no reason you couldn't put in the effort to adopt them (and specifically them) as well. I suspect a loving son/daughter would be worth more than a puppy. But the real point here is that the people who are basically going 'I love my dog and don't give a crap about a baby' are kind of being ignorant and short-sighted. A dog typically lives about 10-13 or so years. A human typically lives 70+. You save that baby and put in the effort and you have a friend for life and possibly even family. You save that dog and you might be happy for a decade; but then you're gonna have a veeeerrrryyy sad month before having to go down to get a new dog anyways. Plus, let's say you *did* leave the dog behind. There's ample shelters that would practically beg you to adopt so, assuming you're not a terrible owner (and saving a child over a dog certainly isn't going to count against you) getting a new dog is only 200-500 bucks (you'd be paying as much for a new gaming console). A new baby is a minimum of 9 months of waiting even if it's 'free' (which is debatable). So I really don't see how anyone could even consider the dog.
---

The baby would go to the next of kin for the parents. You can't just adopt someone's baby randomly in this situation unless there is no other family for the baby to go to.
---

I really don't even understand why anyone is arguing for the baby when the Earth is already grossly overpopulated.
---

As tough as it would be, I think I'd have to save the baby. I'd feel guilty either way but I think I'd feel more guilty in the long run knowing i let a baby die in a fire

But then again, this is one of those situations where it's difficult to gauge your reaction until it actually happens

Unbridled9 posted...

It depends. Typically you're right in that you can't just take a baby with you. However there's also no reason you couldn't put in the effort to adopt them (and specifically them) as well. I suspect a loving son/daughter would be worth more than a puppy. But the real point here is that the people who are basically going 'I love my dog and don't give a crap about a baby' are kind of being ignorant and short-sighted. A dog typically lives about 10-13 or so years. A human typically lives 70+. You save that baby and put in the effort and you have a friend for life and possibly even family. You save that dog and you might be happy for a decade; but then you're gonna have a veeeerrrryyy sad month before having to go down to get a new dog anyways. Plus, let's say you *did* leave the dog behind. There's ample shelters that would practically beg you to adopt so, assuming you're not a terrible owner (and saving a child over a dog certainly isn't going to count against you) getting a new dog is only 200-500 bucks (you'd be paying as much for a new gaming console). A new baby is a minimum of 9 months of waiting even if it's 'free' (which is debatable). So I really don't see how anyone could even consider the dog.

Easier. Because its their dog. You act as if dogs are that replaceable. When my dogs die, they are replaceable. Like people, they have personalities. One of my dogs loves to hug, but does lick very often. My other dogs loves to constantly lick your face, but wont play, Im gonna get your nose like my other dog. They are like kids in being different. And not replaceable. I could get another dog. But adoption agencies are also trying to get people to adopt rather than have their own, as well. And, like Jen said, the kid will go to the next of kin or other family first. Unless you are the God Parent. But then, its not a random kid which probably changes the scenario. Chances are very low you would actually get the child. Now just low, but very low. Especially if they have family.

I would want to save my dog. Not because I dont give a crap about the baby. But because I unconditionally love my dogs. And saving a baby by letting your other dog burn might count against. Not to mention, it seems like youre trying to replace you dog that you let burn for a child with another. Either way, it sounds like the dog is replaceable to you with a child or another baby. When you can also technically replace the baby, as well.

Also, now all dogs cost that much. Thats for a pet shop that usually dont care about your history. I paid $40 at the most for each of my dogs. Got my cat for free.
---

OhhhJa posted...

this is one of those situations where it's difficult to gauge your reaction until it actually happens

I agree with this.
---

dancer62 posted...

OTOH, two idiot teenagers can start another urban blight baby to contribute to overpopulation in 10 minutes.

*sigh* we all know what that means
---

The baby.
---

In times of crisis, personal interests come first and I would absolutely expect anybody to put themselves first.
---

i dont know about you guys but i have an alienware gaming pc...

Sand_Flare posted...

Whatever dipshit answers that they'd save their dog actually deserves to be the one to die in the fire.

Plot twist, that child grows up to be hitler! Whos the monster now?
---

Johnny Eagle posted...

The baby, since I don't have a dog

This. Also, when the hell did I get a child?

EnvyFox posted...

Johnny Eagle posted...

The baby, since I don't have a dog

This. Also, when the hell did I get a child?

Its not yours, its some random baby that means nothing to you.

MirMiros posted...

EnvyFox posted...

Johnny Eagle posted...

The baby, since I don't have a dog

This. Also, when the hell did I get a child?

Its not yours, its some random baby that means nothing to you.

Actually, in this scanario, you have your own child in one hand. The other child is a random child.
---

BeerOnTap posted...

If you value the life of an animal that will likely only live on average 12-15 years over a human being then you have completely misaligned priorities.

Why should some random persons baby come into my priorities?

GanglyKhan posted...

I really don't even understand why anyone is arguing for the baby when the Earth is already grossly overpopulated.

Well if you stand in a firing line I'm sure someone would be happy to cull the herd.
---

dogs are pretty gross and overrated,

that baby could become a world changing scientist
---

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

You can care about strangers without having to resort to losing another life you care about.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about animals or not having it, says everything about a person.

---

-Komaiko54- posted...

dogs are pretty gross and overrated,

that baby could become a world changing scientist

But would that baby bite intruders and show undying loyalty for its entire life?
---

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

You can care about strangers without having to resort to losing another life you care about.

Humans mostly outlive their dogs. I love my dogs but they probably can't change the world the way one human can. A human child is filled with endless possibilities to inspire, ignite and create positive change for the world.

Therefore, while losing a dear pet is heartbreaking, knowing that the child I saved could become someone that creates a world where no child or pet ever burns to death again, makes that decision the right one for everyone.
---

What if the baby turns into the next Hitler? My dog won't start a genocide.

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

You can care about strangers without having to resort to losing another life you care about.

Humans mostly outlive their dogs. I love my dogs but they probably can't change the world the way one human can. A human child is filled with endless possibilities to inspire, ignite and create positive change for the world.

Therefore, while losing a dear pet is heartbreaking, knowing that the child I saved could become someone that creates a world where no child or pet ever burns to death again, makes that decision the right one for everyone.

Ita not the right choice for everyone. Theres also a chance that child destroys the world. Probably burns it because his parents died in a fire. The child could change the world and make it better or worse. But that wasnt my original point. All I was saying is just because you value the life of a pet that you love as child over a random child doesnt mean you dont care about strangers. It means you just value the life of your pet that you unconditionally love over a random baby...
---

SkynyrdRocker posted...

What if the baby turns into the next Hitler? My dog won't start a genocide.

If society let's another Hitler rise to power, cough cough, that is society's fault.
---

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

You can care about strangers without having to resort to losing another life you care about.

Humans mostly outlive their dogs. I love my dogs but they probably can't change the world the way one human can. A human child is filled with endless possibilities to inspire, ignite and create positive change for the world.

Therefore, while losing a dear pet is heartbreaking, knowing that the child I saved could become someone that creates a world where no child or pet ever burns to death again, makes that decision the right one for everyone.

Ita not the right choice for everyone. Theres also a chance that child destroys the world. Probably burns it because his parents died in a fire. The child could change the world and make it better or worse. But that wasnt my original point. All I was saying is just because you value the life of a pet that you love as child over a random child doesnt mean you dont care about strangers. It means you just value the life of your pet that you unconditionally love over a random baby...

Choosing a pet over a person, even a stranger, is dark choice.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

You can care about strangers without having to resort to losing another life you care about.

Humans mostly outlive their dogs. I love my dogs but they probably can't change the world the way one human can. A human child is filled with endless possibilities to inspire, ignite and create positive change for the world.

Therefore, while losing a dear pet is heartbreaking, knowing that the child I saved could become someone that creates a world where no child or pet ever burns to death again, makes that decision the right one for everyone.

Ita not the right choice for everyone. Theres also a chance that child destroys the world. Probably burns it because his parents died in a fire. The child could change the world and make it better or worse. But that wasnt my original point. All I was saying is just because you value the life of a pet that you love as child over a random child doesnt mean you dont care about strangers. It means you just value the life of your pet that you unconditionally love over a random baby...

Choosing a pet over a person, even a stranger, is dark choice.

No. Its not. For you, it might be. But I wouldnt even want to live if I let my pet burn to death. If I knew that was going to happen if I left them, Id rather wait with them.

But since I would hypothetically have my kid with me, Id take my kid and pet first. Realistically, things would probably be different in real life. I would tell rescuers that I think there was a baby alive inside. Or Id try to go back in. Hypothetical questions like this dont always work out so well when it has to perfectly work out like this.
---

The baby, easily.
---

LinkPizza posted...

But I wouldnt even want to live if I let my pet burn to death. If I knew that was going to happen if I left them, Id rather wait with them.

So, you'd rather die with your pet than live and save a stranger's baby? Ok. I'm going to end this discussion here.
---

Obviously the dog. Why would I care what happens to someone else's kid when my own pet, who I promised to protect for the entire rest of its life, needs my immediate help? Honestly I think anyone who cares so little about their pets that they'd sacrifice them for a stranger, should never have gotten those pets.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Having the ability to care about strangers or not having it, says everything about a person.

So only caring about those close to me and not random folk who have zero impact of my life says what exactly? I'm very much interested in your very deep and well thought out logic.

SunWuKung420 posted...

So, you'd rather die with your pet than live and save a stranger's baby? Ok.

Do you/have you had any pets that have been part of your life for years?
---

wwinterj25 posted...

Do you/have you had any pets that have been part of your life for years?

My current 20lb dachshund left San Diego with me 16 years ago, he was 2 years old at the time. We first met when he was 6 weeks old. He can still sprint on level ground but stairs are out of the question. I'm also pretty sure I'm capable of carrying a baby (they only weigh a pound @Jen0125) and any dog up to say 60-75 lbs (depending on how much they squirm) anyways.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

But I wouldnt even want to live if I let my pet burn to death. If I knew that was going to happen if I left them, Id rather wait with them.

So, you'd rather die with your pet than live and save a stranger's baby? Ok. I'm going to end this discussion here.

I would. Because, to me, my pets ARE my children. They love me unconditinally as I love them. They trust me to protect them. Sounds like you dont have someone you love as much, though. I couldnt bear to live knowing I sacrificed their life to save someone else. Someone I dont even know.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

wwinterj25 posted...

Do you/have you had any pets that have been part of your life for years?

My current 20lb dachshund left San Diego with me 16 years ago, he was 2 years old at the time. We first met when he was 6 weeks old. He can still sprint on level ground but stairs are out of the question. I'm also pretty sure I'm capable of carrying a baby (they only weigh a pound @Jen0125) and any dog up to say 60-75 lbs (depending on how much they squirm) anyways.

I believe the you have a toddler in one hand, and. Wed to carry a dog and another baby(I dont know the age). Irl, most people here could probably make it out with everyone. But due to the questions restrictions, we cant.
---

Baby. Sorry doge, but human lives are worth more.

LinkPizza posted...

I couldnt bear to live knowing I sacrificed their life to save someone else. Someone I dont even know.

If the parents died, raise the child. If they survived, become a surrogate big brother.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

I couldnt bear to live knowing I sacrificed their life to save someone else. Someone I dont even know.

If the parents died, raise the child. If they survived, become a surrogate big brother.

We went through that earlier. Chances of you raising the child are slim to none. They would go to other family first. There are special circumstances, but chances of those applying are also slim.

Even if you could raise the child or be a surrogate big brother/sister, it would be much harder. Id still probably resent the child for having to give up the life or my pet that I raised from a puppy who trusted me to save him, to save the kid. I would want to resent the kid, but I most likely would. And (s)he would pick up on it. Kids can pick up those feelings easily.

Also, the parents are most likely dead. There are passed out and the apartment collapses after you get out.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

he was 2 years old at the time.

I see. Well we had out cat for around 16 years and got him when he was a kitten. He died some years ago but had he been in a burning building you bet I'd have saved his ass or have died trying over some random baby that I have no connection too. My point is if you've had a pet that was as good as family you probably would feel the same.

SunWuKung420 posted...

If the parents died, raise the child. If they survived, become a surrogate big brother.

Why do you think it works this way? Why does anyone? The kid would be put right into the system and although you can try and adopt or the like chances are extremely slim you'll ever see the kid again.
---

Someone else's child. I've noticed that liberals/atheists often choose the dog because they don't value the sanctity of life as much and are very selfish (hence pro-choice stances). It's tough to lose an animal-they're innocent after all, but they are just animals at the end of the day.
---