Why do so many people care about the life of one single puppy?

Question

I asked one single question: "How much money would it take for you to kill a puppy with your bare hands?" 29/30 respondents replied that I was a sick f***. I'm glad that people have some morals.

However, how many of you people actually go out and protest wars like the unjust wars in Africa that make kids kill each other? So many innocent people die daily from wars. But you spend your time and energy complaining about one single puppy. Isn't that a little hypocritical that you can spend your energy on a puppy but not on the lives of millions?

Ethical values in the English-speaking world are screwed. We only care about stuff that is related to us and ignore issues that occur far away. We need to rethink our principles and morals to encompass all of life, not only that little puppy next door.

What makes that puppy so much more important than the child thousands of miles away? It's just that the child would require more effort to save. We pick and choose.

I never ever condoned the murder of a puppy. I like animals a lot. I'm just saying some of our energy is very misplaced. The original question was a joke, and people were so enraged with it. I think we should spend some energy on more important issues.

Answer 1

Why not care about the puppy? It doesn't make a person bad because of that. I personally don't give to charities for other countries because most charities are scams. Very little if any of the money ever makes it to the intended people. Why throw good money away.

Also, people who don't care about helpless animals are also not going to care about other humans. You should be glad that they care about the abusive treatment of an animal because they are the same ones who care about abused children.

Your question was a sick one and it absolutely does not even relate to ethical values in the English speaking world. Apparently you would feel better if everyone agreed on killing puppies. That's how many serial killers get started.

Answer 2

I think you've set up a false premise here. I'm glad that so many people care about the life of that single puppy because almost all of those same people also care about "unjust wars in Africa that make kids kill each other."
The difference, perhaps, is while you may be able to save that puppy, most of us probably feel that going out and protesting" is a wasted effort.
It's not a case of the puppy OR the child; it's the puppy AND the child.

Answer 3

I don't think people care more about a puppy than they do about the millions of people who die from wars. It's just that people feel somewhat overwhelmed and powerless when it comes to trying to do anything about a complex, multi-faceted situation like a war, whereas they feel that they could have some control over the life of one puppy. I also think that the belief that "Ethical values of people in the English speaking world are screwed" is a very bigoted, closed minded belief. You sound far too intelligent to have such a simplified view of people.

Answer 4

THANK YOU! I could not agree more. I totally agree that the values of most people are totally f*cked up. Nobody really cares about anything that is not in front of their faces. They will buy luxury cars, not caring that for the price of their unnecessary car they could have saved literally hundreds of lives. (According to unicef, it only costs a dollar to vaccinate a child against diseases which are the leading cause of childhood deaths in the third world. Even if that one child wouldn't have died, for the cost of a few hundred dollars, a person will likely save the lives of several.) But do people do anything? no, they say that its a shame whats going on in the world, but then go buy ipods and other luxury items. They get all upset about killing a puppy, then eat hamburgers which were made from cows which suffered more than that puppy would have. They say abortion is murder, then pay taxes and wave the flag of a country they feel is committing a holocaust. (Personally, I don't think abortion is murder, but I think if a person does really believe that a nation is killing a million innocents a year, they should not be directly supporting such a nation. What would we think of russians who knew about stalin's purges, but continued to actively support the soviet state?)

Sorry if this sounds too much like a crazy rant, but i've been studying ethics for the past few years, and it has really opened up my eyes to how f*cked up most people's value systems are. There really is no sense of obligation in most people today.

Schleppy: I wish I could agree with you, but frankly, everybody knows that people die from preventable diseases in the world; everybody has heard of sudan, if not malawi and uganda. Not one single adult can honestly claim that they do not know that there are aid agencies they can donate to, and that people's lives can be saved for a fraction of what we spend on personal luxuries. Yet still most people do nothing. Yes most people do feel powerless, but when the chips are down and they actually have the means to save lives (as everybody does everyday through donating money to vaccination, birth control, or famine relief causes) they do nothing. I agree that the way the system is set up is conducive to a selfish, consumerist-oriented attitude, but we still have some degree of freedom, and ultimately need to grow up and be responsible for our actions.

JEFFBEV: unicef and oxfam are two very distinguished organizations. they even tell you what percentage of your money goes to what. I believe that unicef has 90-95% of its donated money go directly to the programs.

Answer 5

I don't really see it as one is "better than" or more important than the other. I guess people usually see human beings as having free will and the choice to do things, whereas when you picture a small puppy in your head you see a creature who is completely defenseless and at your mercy. It can be argued that kids in Africa don't have any choice in being forced into wars, and maybe a lot of them don't have a choice, but a puppy or kitten or baby seal or whatever type of animal (especially a baby one) seems completely at the mercy of others. I don't know, you can't compare apples and oranges. Or puppies and African war children. It's all relative.

Answer 6

I would care enough not to torture an animal to death. Of course, there's nothing wrong with properly killing an animal for food, but it most likely wouldn't be a puppy or a dog.
Some who have bleeding hearts for animals, think nothing of snuffing the life of an unborn baby--that's barbaric!

Answer 7

Human moral seems working better if object of love is wordless, otherwise it would be devastating....Imagine that dogs become conscious...They already took over happy "owners", sleeping in their beds, demanding priority and attention, having hospitals and spas as human does...Tendency to humanize animals comes from tendency to humanize God...as a result pets develoring human diseases, and god is not really that loving as we wishing to.. .Would be much more useful to humanize those who entitle to be a human, .... ourselves ... But very good post, I am glad that I am not only one who deliberated over that ridiculous situation people created for themselves..

Answer 8

The puppy represents life as a whole.

Answer 9

So very true and well said!

Answer 10

BE CAUSE IT IS A BEAUTIFUL CREATURE