Cincinatti Zoo officials shoot and kill gorilla after child falls into enclosure

[Joe Republic]

All these bizarre and improbable hypotheticals have got me wondering though... so here's a new one:

Koko the gorilla and [tw] Donald Trump are both drowning in a river.  You can only save one.  Which do you choose?

[Badger]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

Misanthropy is kewl, don'tcha know?

[Oakvale]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read from you. You usually take the only sensible stance, but this isn't even open for debate.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

You're trying way too hard.

[Oakvale]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read from you. You usually take the only sensible stance, but this isn't even open for debate.

What's the gorilla/kid tradeoff? Presumably (?) you'd agree that massacring every gorilla alive to save one child is over the top. 100 gorillas per kid? We're just arguing about details.

[IceSpear]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

You're trying way too hard.

I voted yes in this poll, but no is a far more justifiable stance than yours in the other thread is...

[Speed of Sound]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

You're trying way too hard.

I voted yes in this poll, but no is a far more justifiable stance than yours in the other thread is...

Antonio enjoys his pulpit. The message is of less importance.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jesus. Almost 40% here would've said the very very real risk of the kid dying wasn't worth it.

It's probably for the best that many here don't/won't have kids of their own, but c'mon now.

One kid is mathematically less important than a gorilla. Not sure why it's complicated.

You're trying way too hard.

I voted yes in this poll, but no is a far more justifiable stance than yours in the other thread is...

Antonio enjoys his pulpit. The message is of less importance.

Really? That's the impression you get from my posts?

[afleitch]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying, if the boy falls in and calls out in distress or his mother does then because I can understand him and I cannot communicate with the gorilla, I can't be blind to the calls for help. That would be inhuman. So I would save the child.

Likewise if Johnny Human is having fun torturing another gorilla and the gorilla is distressed, I'd immobilise the human because I can understand the gorilla's distress.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying,

I thought you identified as a humanist.

[afleitch]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying,

I thought you identified as a humanist.

I am. I don't see why I should lack concern for the wellbeing of animals given that animal husbandry is one of the hallmarks of what makes us human.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying,

I thought you identified as a humanist.

I am. I don't see why I should lack concern for the wellbeing of animals given that animal husbandry is one of the hallmarks of what makes us human.

Lack of concern for the wellbeing of animals is not the issue here. I don't think anyone here is arguing it's OK to kill gorillas for fun.

My point is that, if the word humanism has any meaning, it means attaching the highest intrinsic moral value to the human person. And this, in turn, entails that the only moral choice is to protect the human's life over the animal's regardless of the specifics of a situation.

[SWE]

Don't intervene and let the free market decide which one lives.

[Goldwater]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying,

I thought you identified as a humanist.

I am. I don't see why I should lack concern for the wellbeing of animals given that animal husbandry is one of the hallmarks of what makes us human.

Lack of concern for the wellbeing of animals is not the issue here. I don't think anyone here is arguing it's OK to kill gorillas for fun.

My point is that, if the word humanism has any meaning, it means attaching the highest intrinsic moral value to the human person. And this, in turn, entails that the only moral choice is to protect the human's life over the animal's regardless of the specifics of a situation.

I think this is the part most people are taking issue with. At least, I know it's the part I am.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As much as 'speciesism' is frankly annoying,

I thought you identified as a humanist.

I am. I don't see why I should lack concern for the wellbeing of animals given that animal husbandry is one of the hallmarks of what makes us human.

Lack of concern for the wellbeing of animals is not the issue here. I don't think anyone here is arguing it's OK to kill gorillas for fun.

My point is that, if the word humanism has any meaning, it means attaching the highest intrinsic moral value to the human person. And this, in turn, entails that the only moral choice is to protect the human's life over the animal's regardless of the specifics of a situation.

I think this is the part most people are taking issue with. At least, I know it's the part I am.

I mean, you're free to take issue with it. Just don't call yourself a humanist. Words need to have some kind of meaning to them.

[IceSpear]

Don't intervene and let the free market decide which one lives.

let the states decide

rhode island choose gorilla, oregon choose child

states laboratories of democracy

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Harambe's legacy lives on.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

To parts of Joe's point, I don't think "would you kill a human or gorilla?" is the right question. The dominating questions should be "how did a kid get in there?", "why do we cage gorillas in the first place?", "are there better options in the future?", etc. Pontificating about human greatness doesn't help much from stopping this.

OK, but provided that there was a zoo, that one of its cages had a gorilla in it, that a kid got there somehow, and that he would have died if the gorilla hadn't been killed, isn't this an important moral question to resolve? These things do happen and will sometimes happen. If we can't agree as a society on which of those two lives we value most, that's a serious problem.

It is. It's not crazy to have the view that the gorillas life should be saved instead, but it's definitely worrying.  It shows you how easily these sorts of shared values are lost without a firm agreed upon basis for them.