Love

[thir]

You might think so, but I tend to doubt it. But let's try a couple of examples:
Let's assume that you are on a low bridge over a flooded, raging river. Just downstream is cataract dropping into a rocky canyon, certain death for anyone going over the edge. Coming towards you are two children, trapped in the flood. You can save one, but not both of them, as the are separated in the flow. One of those children is your own. Which would you save?

I don't think anyone would condemn you for choosing your own child over a stranger, and I think most people would make that same choice. But now, replace your child in the water with your beloved pet. Would you allow even a stranger, a child you do not know and love, to die in order to save your pet? I very much doubt it! I think there are few sane people in this world who would.

I kind of knew someone would say that. And I do not know what to answer - that pets are also my children.

Did you see the film 'Sophie's Choice'? A KZ camp prisioner, a mother with two children, were forced to choose which one should go in the gas chamber, or they would both have gone. She chose. But she was never a real person after that.

[Thorne]

I kind of knew someone would say that. And I do not know what to answer - that pets are also my children.

I have difficulty with this concept, but then, I'm not a pet person. I just cannot grasp the idea that someone would put the welfare of any animal above the welfare of even an unknown person.

Did you see the film 'Sophie's Choice'?

No, I've never seen it. But people, both men and women, have been facing such choices since the dawn of humanity. It's a choice I wouldn't want to have to make myself. But we're not talking about choosing between two of your children, but between a child, or any person really, and an animal! One shouldn't even have to think about it.