[Little Hobbit]

I like to think that I'd pick a person, and I probably would. If I had time to make a rational decision I'd definitely save the stranger. However if it was a "PICK NOW!" jump-in-front-of-the-one-you-wish-to-save sort of situation, and it was a beloved pet that I had a connection to and considered part of my family then instinct might get the better of me and I'd jump in front of a pet. I'd feel dreadful afterwards.

In saying that, I don't actually have a "beloved" pet, although I do have non-beloved pets. I'd save a stanger over them.

[plimsolls]

I love my dog, but would save the stranger. Losing my pet would be horrible, but some one could be losing a dad, mother, son, daughter etc, and that would be much worse than losing my fuzz-butt friend.

Imagine that person was your family member or friend and they chose their pet! I'd be so angry i'd want to kill the choose-ee.

[That Bearded Man]

Out of curiosity

Is anyone who picked "save the pet," a medical student?

Or picked "save the stranger" and is a vet?

[Id and Ego seek]

Unless my pet is an endangered animal or dolphin, the human wins every time. As far as I see it, prolonging our species is more important to me than my own wishes; sure my pet will feel pain, but I doubt people choosing pet are focused on that rather than the emotional connection they have and the devastation to them it will cause if their pet died. Me on the other hand, is more concerned with that stranger's family, friends, son(s)/daughter(s) and even their own pet. Plus, everyone is a stranger to you sometime in your life: even your best friend. Fair enough there's not a lot of context given from OP, but if that stranger was someone my own age, I'd feel it was my duty to save them; then we can become best friends, and I can always buy a new pet. A pet, after all, is a household animal kept for companionship and a person's enjoyment; I don't see how that can be saved over another human being, for I'd always look past my emotional connection and do what I think is ethically praiseworthy. There's a lot of factors that need to be taken into consideration, too.

(Original post by plimsolls)
Imagine that person was your family member or friend and they chose their pet! I'd be so angry i'd want to kill the choose-ee.

lol this so much. I'd hate to think I belonged to a world that would allow the suffering of many of their own to prolong the short happiness they experience with their pets. If they were the one's being killed, I wonder if they'd be completely understanding towards the person choosing their pets over their life, considering they believe their life to has worth.

[shmuxel]

To me:

Human Life > Animals

Always.

[Spoogle]

(Original post by shmuxel)
To me:

Human Life > Animals

Always.

This attitude is why we're making so many species extinct.

[green.tea]

(Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
difference being youre the one who actually kills them in this scenario given you chose your pet over them, you are responcible, while with your example, its simply about aid, youre just being kind by helping... not giving aid=/=you killing

you wont mind if i kill you then if i chose between my fish and you?... you are in fact a stranger to me afterall...

The question says save, not kill. You'd be saving someone by selling your stereo and donating the money. You'd be saving Dave the starving african. I find it strange that people, presumably with stereos, would save the stranger but not the pet. Perhaps peoples answers would be different if you never actually saw the stranger? What if someone came to you, showed you a picture of Dave and said that by some hypotheical magic going and getting your pet put down would save his life?

If you killed your pet now, imagine the people you could save with the money you wouldve spent on pet food and vet bills.

[PinkMobilePhone]

I'd save a complete stranger. As much as I love my dog, I value human life more than the life of an animal.

[xXHolly_90Xx]

I'm an animal student and I study them for a reason. I would risk my life for any animal even if it was a strange animal I'd never met.. I'm not sure why but I've always thought like that
Perhaps its just because I've had bad experiences with people and they tend to be selfish so someone needs to stick up for animals! Their lives are just as valuable as ours! We are just animals too
It would be different if it was my family or my boyfriend in trouble though

[Iron Lady]

Obviously my pet.

[Dmon1Unlimited]

(Original post by green.tea)
The question says save, not kill. You'd be saving someone by selling your stereo and donating the money. You'd be saving Dave the starving african. I find it strange that people, presumably with stereos, would save the stranger but not the pet. Perhaps peoples answers would be different if you never actually saw the stranger? What if someone came to you, showed you a picture of Dave and said that by some hypotheical magic going and getting your pet put down would save his life?

If you killed your pet now, imagine the people you could save with the money you wouldve spent on pet food and vet bills.

if you save one, you kill another... do you understand this?

with donating, you choose to obtain responsibility despite you have no obligation (<---emphasis on obligation) because of the goodness of ones heart... here youre forced into a decision, yet youd rather pick a pet you have some short term bond with rather than a human being...

you can delude yourself by bringing in african scenarios but at the end of the day, if you were in that position, youd chosen to kill a person just to save your pet...

they would not be any different... thats why the word STRANGER is used.... but id assume because its a stranger, it is the reason why, as another user calls them, these 'bastards' would leave a person to die because of a pet....

i would save his live at the expense of my pet.... i would be sad that my pet died, even more so if i had a bond, but at the end of the day, id save the human...

im quite shocked that you think saying that acts as some kind of point against me... pshh

obviously youre just hyperboling.... i have no obligation to help people, i do them because it helps them NOT because i HAVE TO... are you so thick you cant understand the difference between both scenarios?

while there are a lot of you people, i can take some solace in the fact that people like me are dominant in the polls... seems there is still hope...

[Popppppy]

(Original post by buddhacoffee)
To me, this question is like saying "who would you save: a beloved family member, or a complete stranger?"
I love my dogs and they are a part of my family; just because they aren't human doesn't give them any less right to live in my opinion, especially when they've given me nothing but love throughout their lives.

So, although it appears to be an unpopular view, I'd pick my pets!

Exactly this.

[shmuxel]

(Original post by Spoogle)
This attitude is why we're making so many species extinct.

Well that's in order to preserve a certain level of human comfort at the expense of animal habitats and species. What i'm talking about is that when it comes to the point of rescuing an animal or human from certain death, the human will always come first for me.

[beepbeeprichie]

Pet, any day.

[Popppppy]

(Original post by shmuxel)
To me:

Human Life > Animals

Always.

So you would save Steven Barker, the man who killed Baby P over a guide dog?

[laura130490]

I think it's really selfish to save your pet over another person, imagine if someone saved their hamster over your mum/dad/brother/sister etc? You'd probably want to kill them. I have pets who I love dearly, but you cannot even compare the love you feel for a dog/cat with the love a child has for their parent or a parent has for their child etc.

[Architecture-er]

Only if it was a personable animal I'd reckon

So dog, horse etc, but sod the bunny rabbits


but I'd also weigh it up on the likelihood of rescuing either one, the age and gender of the person, and so on.

If it was some brummy chav who'd got stuck in a river by being a dick I'd probably save him over my pet, just so I could punch him and throw him back in

[senator88]

(Original post by arnoob)
Situations like this sadly occur in real life, there was a case in NZ a few years ago where a man had to choose between saving his son or his wife. He ended up saving his wife. To answer your question, I'd save a human.

Oh my god that is awful! Makes you wonder what you would do in that situation, but I guess you'd never know.

I really don't understand how some people on here are saying they would save their pet. Yes, the stranger COULD be a bad person, but it would be more than likely they wouldn't be, and that they'd have a family, and maybe even children. I am a massive animal lover and have had my dog since I was a child and love her immensly, but I'm smart enough to know the pain the stranger's family would go through would be a hundred million times worse then the pain I'd feel for losing my dog. Imagine if that was someone you love who was a stranger to someone, and they chose to save their pet? Would you understand?

[Architecture-er]

p.s. love the 'neither' option, as if somebody would just sit down and place bets on which would die first

[zxh800]

The stranger, no question.