Christ. I bet you write these frickin' essays so that people wont bother to answer... Anyways I picked out a bit here that I thought was was worth replying to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altaru
To begin with, where do you get off being able to make the decision of which human is worth more than another? You're not god, and you're not a lord or king. You're simply another human, therefor you have no divine rights by any standards, despite your belief that you do for some reason.
Also, by your own "survival of the strongest" standards, you should leave both to die. Be it a starving child, or a corrupt dictator, or an Amur Leopard, you should leave them to die because if they're dying in the first place, then they CLEARLY aren't the strongest, now are they? After all, you're not dying, therefore, you are strongest. If "survival of the strongest" is natures plan, then saving any of them is messing with that plan.
Not to mention, why bother saving the starving child, if they can't save themselves? If you save them now, they'll grow up believing that they can rely on people to save them if they reach a certain point. By saving them now, you're killing them later anyway...
Again, temporary superiority in play.
Unfortunately, because humans have the whole emotional aspect effecting their thoughts, we place more value on one human life than an entire species of animals. Why? I'll never know. There are apparently 6.684 billion other humans (and counting) if that one should die.
Even if 8 people die out of evey thousand, there's another 20 being born to take their place (according to the CIA 2008 estimates), so letting that one starving child die isn't going to make a world-wide difference, 'cause he'll likely be replaced within the second. However, letting an entire species die could, and likely will, have an enourmous impact.
And it would ALL be the fault of human beings. Not nature, not god. Humans. Would you want to carry the weight of that on your shoulders? Of course not. That's why the majority of the human race, yourself included obviously, just shrugs the facts off by using the "superior race" card.
Great... And I'M the heartless one.
|
First off, try read my post. "To begin with, where do you get off being able to make the decision of which human is worth more than another?" you say? Well:
I don't
And I never said I could/will/should. I just answered your question as to a person theoretically could judge who was worth to save in that scenario.
I never did draw the "save a child vs save an animal" line, so why are you attacking me about that?
To the rest: well, just try to read and understand what I've written so far (noodle too) and you'd see that we don't hate animals at all.