Humans more important than other species

[Poppy]

Recent terror attacks:20 posts
Plane crash in Alps:12 posts
Plane crash at LaGuardia:4 posts
Bin Lorry crash in Glasgow:7 posts
A lot more posts than those involving animals suffering. If animal cruelty is depressing, human suffering should be depressing as well.
Just going by my own country:if you endorse either party which usually involves minimizing the government's role in the 9 billion farm animals dying per year, that seems speciest. If you're much more angered by the things dictatorships have done to humans compared to the horrendous animal suffering that many democracies have caused, that seems speciest.

Most of the human suffering that comes from sudden, unexpected terrorist activity or insanity is immediately on the news - and discussed ad nauseam for days on end. We come to feel we can offer nothing new to any discussion because because every detail has been discussed inside and out on every news station.

 

[Moll Flanders]

If I was a firefighter running into a burning house, and there was an old, decrepit human being and a young, healthy puppy dog, I definitely would save the human being (who probably does not have to live as long as the young, healthy dog) first.

I sometimes think of these highly unlikely scenarios. Well if I was a firefighter I would probably have to save the human first as that is the job but if it was just me and it was my dog I'm pretty sure I would save him/her instead of the man. Just being honest.

I would always be more likely to protect a baby or a child over an adult and I would be more likely to protect a woman over a man.

That reminds me of a very sad story about someone I met briefly who did cat rescue work. She had a fire at her house and she had to be stopped by the firefighters as she kept trying to get back in to save her cats. She lost quite a lot of them in the fire.

 

[rainforests1]

Most of the human suffering that comes from sudden, unexpected terrorist activity or insanity is immediately on the news - and discussed ad nauseam for days on end. We come to feel we can offer nothing new to any discussion because because every detail has been discussed inside and out on every news station.

People respond more to human suffering(which is talked about by the media) than animal suffering(usually ignored by the media). Shouldn't it be the opposite based on your claim?

 

[Poppy]

People respond more to human suffering(which is talked about by the media) than animal suffering(usually ignored by the media). Shouldn't it be the opposite based on your claim?

I'm confused. You don't think vvers respond to threads about human suffering as much as they do to animal suffering, right? And my point is that human stories are so front and center in the media, that there's not a whole lot more to say than "oh that's awful". Whereas, animals stories, which are not as popular in the media, more likely to get responses from vvers. Just my thoughts, anyway.

 

[Mischief]

I'm confused. You don't think vvers respond to threads about human suffering as much as they do to animal suffering, right? And my point is that human stories are so front and center in the media, that there's not a whole lot more to say than "oh that's awful". Whereas, animals stories, which are not as popular in the media, more likely to get responses from vvers. Just my thoughts, anyway.

I think it's the other way around. RF thinks that VVers respond more to human stories than to the stories about animals he posts, thus proving that we are all human-centric specieists.

 

[Poppy]

Oh, ha! Yes, I completely mis-read that. Ok, so perhaps we don't respond to animal stories as much as human stories because, even though they are not as well publicized by the general media, our individual news feeds are inundated with sad stories, animals who need to be adopted TODAY, and links to all the animal welfare groups we support. I could honestly spend my whole day responding to animal stories on FB.