Who would you save: A beloved pet or a complete stranger?

Well I didn't know and had to make a guess. On the other hand, if you're going to be a commercial lawyer, theres no problem whatsoever. I'm sure you will think up many devious ways to screw customers over by making incomprehensible contracts :P Mergers would also work. Better make sure you're not defending a company against environmental accusations though - I don't think claiming that its stupid not to get medication for asthma is an acceptable defence for a company's toxic fumes killing asthma patients!

It could perhaps be contributorily negligent, however

Notice how close the polls are? What does that tell you about humanity? (Note: I voted for my pet).

I think the people saying that they'd choose their pet over a stranger aren't stupid, or morally inept, they're just honest.

I absolutely understand that a human life is more valuable than an animal life. I absolutely understand that to save your pet over someone's mother/father/child is completely unjustifiable.
I however know that put me in that situation and all rational thought would go out of the window. Whilst I want to save a human and should save a human, I have a feeling instinct would take over and I'd be running out of that burning building with my dog.

Well there are two types of people who choose their pet. One type is as you have described, and I guess that is indeed honesty. Even if you understand that a human life is worth more, you may make an irrational decision under pressure.

But then there are those who argue that, even on an intellectual level, in the comfort and safety of their homes, sitting at their computers, they still believe choosing their pet is the right decision. And that is disgusting to my sense of morality and society's system of ethics.

If my dog were still alive and it were her and a person I'd pick her. I really did love her, I'll always miss her. That sort of emotion would have to win out in that situation regardless of what seems rational

I'd save a beloved pet anytime. Its just natural instinct to protect the things you love.

Pet, easily. I have no attachment to a stranger. For all I know they're a fraud or murderer. Pets are always innocent.

Edit: What on earth is so controversial about this? But I suppose to further elaborate, and after reading the responses in my thread, my view has altered slightly. I would save an animal I considered to be a genuine member of the family, like a dog, horse, cat etc. But a snake? Rabbit? I'd definitely change to the stranger. Maybe choosing my pet makes me selfish, but I've never denied that and I've never been a massive fan of humanity anyway. It's incredibly unlikely you will save a totally innocent person, whereas the pet will always be 100% pure. Although given the actual situation, it may be more difficult to save a pet if the other option is a child, whilst with an elderly stranger I'd pick the pet for certain. If anyone would actually like to discuss this rather than just negging, I'd be more than happy.

The pet.

You people are all very worrying individuals. Very worrying indeed.

It tells you that if you were in a fire and people didn't know you, there is a very high chance that they would rather save their dog than you.

So loving a family member makes us worrying individuals does it?

Pet, easily. I have no attachment to a stranger. For all I know they're a fraud or murderer. Pets are always innocent.
The pet will always be 100% pure.