But there were no resources that the human needed. They only needed a bandaid. So, no, you didn’t address why “put it down” was the reasonable choice. The question was a decision to treat 1) a severely injured animal and 2) putting a bandaid on a human. In this senario, there were no resources that could be used for the human. The reply was still “put it down”.
Original question fixed.
The question asked was not about a fatally injured dog. It was asked about a seriously injured dog. There is no reason to think the question was about a fatally injured animal without hope of recovery. On the other hand though, the human in question needed a bandaid. I agree, the priority would be obvious to most people.
The thousands of dollars that will be needed to treat the animal would be better spent in helping humans. If not the bandaid, how about the family down the street who will go to bed hungry and have no fuel for the furnace this winter?
Rence correctly (and charitably) interpreted my hypothetical.
The question asked was not about a fatally injured dog. It was asked about a seriously injured dog. There is no reason to think the question was about a fatally injured animal without hope of recovery. On the other hand though, the human in question needed a bandaid. Yet the answer was to choose to put the dog down, and instead, your priority was putting the bandaid on the human.
See my post #44.
Thankfully, most people would think it is obvious, painfully obvious, that the human needing the bandaid can wait, and the seriously injured dog, would need to be seen by a vet. There is no reason to think the situation is hopeless for the dog until even examined by a vet. The GIVEN in the original question is that the animal needed, and would have benefitted from, the medical intervention. It’s not a given in this senario that the dog was fatally injured, just seriously injured. The two are not the same.
One does not need to see post 44 to answer his hypothetical senario, because it is HIS senario. His senario was very simple: 1) seriously injured dog 2) human needing a bandaid. In his senario, it’s a given that the dog would have benefitted from doctoring, and was not fatally injured. You are welcome though, to create a different senario
Again, see my post #44. The money could be better spent.
This senario has nothing to do with the family down the street. Nice try though.
Ok, I’ll bite: whether or not the dog in Spenclo’s senario got medical attention has no bearing whatsoevrer if the family down the street would get the dog owner’s money.
It’s not a different scenario. Even if the dog can be saved, it doesn’t necessarily mean that one is morally obligated to save it. That money could be used to feed a child or even give medical treatment to a human that needs it but can’t afford it.One does not need to see post 44 to answer his hypothetical senario, because it is HIS senario. His senario was very simple: 1) seriously injured dog 2) human needing a bandaid. In his senario, it’s a given that the dog would have benefitted from doctoring, and was not fatally injured. You are welcome though, to create a different senario
The cost of a bandaid is pennies.Exactly!
See above posts for the rational behind my choices.
That’s not the point. The point is human life has more worth than an animal’s life. Using the resources that God has given you to treat a dog is not being a good steward.
The money used to care for the injured animal has nothing to do with the neighbor down the street. There is nothing to say that the dog owner’s money would be shunted elsewhere.
It most certainly is. My hypothetical restricted your choice to two options, in an attempt to illustrate that the welfare of humans do not always trump the welfare of animals. If you pick choice (a), as most people would, that demonstrates my point. I think you understand this, which is why you are resisting (i.e., dodging) the question.
You may be able to set the scenario, but why would one be restricted to only two choices. Let’s at least agree to be realistic and not live in Fantasy Land.
Are you actually reading my posts?
