Humans behaving badly means zoo animals die

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is that human life so much more valuable than that of the gorilla? the gorilla is one of a critically endangered species, the kid is probably headed to nowhere fast. I just don't see it. do what you can to save the kid, certainly, but don't kill the gorilla.

No one is going to save a gorilla over a child! Jeez!

+1 You sound unhinged.

Well, I'm not. Just trying to understand why the boy is thst much more valuable than the gorilla. One out of 5 billion (& likely not too bright) vs 1 out of 175,000. Would you kill 5 gorillas to save one human? Are all humans equal?

Yes, and yes.

You're welcome!

[Anonymous]

Mother is a big fat woman who has multiple baby daddies. Father has a long criminal history. Mother actually works at a daycare center-she should most definitely be fired. Would you send your kid there after this. The daddy also has other kids (with other women of course) and the mom of one of them (not Michelle Greggs kid) said on FB that if the kid is like his daddy he must be bad. That says a lot. She added that she would woop her own kids ass if he ever did anything like this. Out of control assholes. And now they will have a big fat payday by suing the zoo. They should be the ones in the cage-not the poor gorilla. So damn infuriating....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mother is a big fat woman who has multiple baby daddies. Father has a long criminal history. Mother actually works at a daycare center-she should most definitely be fired. Would you send your kid there after this. The daddy also has other kids (with other women of course) and the mom of one of them (not Michelle Greggs kid) said on FB that if the kid is like his daddy he must be bad. That says a lot. She added that she would woop her own kids ass if he ever did anything like this. Out of control assholes. And now they will have a big fat payday by suing the zoo. They should be the ones in the cage-not the poor gorilla. So damn infuriating....

All the kids have the same father.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]To all you bashing the childs mom- has your kid ever fallen? Have you ever tended to one kid when the other ran off? Have you ever had a kid run out into the street and you were scared? Has your toddler fallen down the steps because you thought he was safe and might have went to the bathroom? Shit happens to everyone. I am a VERY careful mom- and had an near death experience with my 3 year old when getting my older child dressed and he ran off. I sure hope the mom never reads this- as she probably feels enough guilt and sadness already. Doesnt need you evil people bashing her too. What is wrong with you people?[/quote]

Shit happens. Most of the time when shit happens, it doesn't result in the killing of a rare and endangered animal. I think people are bashing the mom because she doesn't seem to accept any responsibility or understand the gravity of her carelessness. [/quote]

My general sense is that, this being America, what now matters, potentially, is litigation. I have no idea about the merits, but I imagine the zoo could be slapped with a hefty, hefty lawsuit. Surely it knows this.

[Anonymous]

There is nothing heroic about treating a gorilla's life as the moral equivalent of a human life. It's evidence of pagan decadence to think like that. To suggest that the boy’s life and well-being should be weighed in the balance with the gorilla’s suggests a moral equivalence between people and animals that is non-existent.How the boy got into his situation is a separate moral question from what to do once he was in the situation. Once he was in the enclosure, the only priority should have been to protect the boy at all costs. Human beings alone are created in God’s image and as such have a superior value and dignity over all other creatures. Despite the “outrage” from animal rights supporters, the zoo did the right thing to protect the boy. And I’m glad they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am sort of torn in multiple ways. First, the mom did not win me over with her statement. I want her to show some sadness for the loss of the Gorilla and show some recognition that her son's actions caused this loss. On the other hand, as a parent of an ADHD kid, I can tell you that I can't always keep my kid out of danger. It is not possible. I don't think many commentators really get this. I have another kid also, who I trust more. Not all kids are the same, so even if you have a great kid and feel like you are a great parent, you really can't know what is going on in another family.

The last thing that bothers me is the zoo. I don't like zoos in the first place, but the exhibits are trying to get you as close as possible. If a 4 year old can figure out how to break into an exhibit, then maybe it is time to rethink the design. You can't make a design for rationale people, you really need to think about cases where people want to get into the exhibit.

Yes you can keep an active, impulsive kid safe. You either put them on a leash, in a stroller, hold their hand. This boy was 3 years old. And he appears to be a "young" 3. It was ridiculous for that mom not to have that kid's hand, or have him in a stroller or even on a leash in a crowded situation like that. Or she simply could have brought another adult along to help supervise the kids.

I say this as a mom with 2 active boys who are 2 1/2 years apart. I took them to lots of playgrounds, parks, nature centers, fairs, museums and, yes, to the zoo. You keep one in the stroller and you hold the other one's hand in crowded situations like that. You also know to give them run around time in a safe, uncrowded area where the visibility is good and you can see everything that they are doing.

This little boy was too young to be moving independently through a crowded situation. That mom was not doing a good job of watching him and she was even aware that he was fascinated by the water in the moat. At this point, it is a miracle that this boy is still alive and that he wasn't injured very badly. She could be planning a funeral today...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly they had to. It was a little child.

The gorilla is an endangered species and was more valuable than this brat who is not an endangered species. These low lives will now sue but they should be put in jail.

In what way is a gorilla more valuable than a human child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing heroic about treating a gorilla's life as the moral equivalent of a human life. It's evidence of pagan decadence to think like that. To suggest that the boy’s life and well-being should be weighed in the balance with the gorilla’s suggests a moral equivalence between people and animals that is non-existent.How the boy got into his situation is a separate moral question from what to do once he was in the situation. Once he was in the enclosure, the only priority should have been to protect the boy at all costs. Human beings alone are created in God’s image and as such have a superior value and dignity over all other creatures. Despite the “outrage” from animal rights supporters, the zoo did the right thing to protect the boy. And I’m glad they did.

Another unhinged asshole . Why do idiots like you think your religious doctrine is universally accepted ?

[Anonymous]

Before I saw any pics of this story my first thought was "another payday for parents who assign blame for the (bad) actions of their own child." The Pittsburgh Zoo had to pay money to the mom who placed her 2 yr old on the barrier (a 4 ft long platform at a 45 degree angle away from the deadly dog enclosure). That child was killed immediately but that mom's actions were directly related to the child's death.

[Anonymous]

Every human being, theoretically, has unlimited potential to create and change something in the world for the better one day. A gorilla will always just be a gorilla, even the greatest gorilla of all time. Human life always wins. End of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was sad. Should have shot the parents too.

Oh, come on, what a horrible thing to say or even think.

Unless you are Trump, of course, and you're going to kill the parents of all terrorists and criminals.

[Anonymous]

She is a lazy and negligent parent, and she should be the ones sued for damages, but most likely in this insane culture she will get paid for damages bcs she can't watch her own child. Harambe paid with his life for her laziness. I blame her entirely, zoo did what it had to do. Too bad we can't put her down, yes, I said it. She can sue me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing heroic about treating a gorilla's life as the moral equivalent of a human life. It's evidence of pagan decadence to think like that. To suggest that the boy’s life and well-being should be weighed in the balance with the gorilla’s suggests a moral equivalence between people and animals that is non-existent.How the boy got into his situation is a separate moral question from what to do once he was in the situation. Once he was in the enclosure, the only priority should have been to protect the boy at all costs. Human beings alone are created in God’s image and as such have a superior value and dignity over all other creatures. Despite the “outrage” from animal rights supporters, the zoo did the right thing to protect the boy. And I’m glad they did.

Another unhinged asshole . Why do idiots like you think your religious doctrine is universally accepted ?

If it's not, then why are human lives more valuable than gorillas'?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parent should have been watching better. But also zoo's fault - who builds railings that a 4 year old can fall through, into the moat?! Regardless, gorilla was attacking the child. The zoo made the right call.

Gorilla was not attacking the child. Yes, it dragged him through the water because it was in a way trying to take him out of the situation as it was panicking from all the screaming people, at first it was actually protecting the child by the wall as seen in the video, then again calmly looking at child. If people kept calm maybe Harambe wouldn't have panicked. Even then he was protecting the boy, yes he dragged him the way it knew how, it was his way of protecting the child from what he perceived a threat from a crowd. But, also, yes, gorilla is extremely powerful and might have hurt the boy unintentionally but it didn't. He was a better parent than the boy's own parents to that little boy, and ended up dead for it. If you see he is just trying to get away from screaming. People are idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing heroic about treating a gorilla's life as the moral equivalent of a human life. It's evidence of pagan decadence to think like that. To suggest that the boy’s life and well-being should be weighed in the balance with the gorilla’s suggests a moral equivalence between people and animals that is non-existent.How the boy got into his situation is a separate moral question from what to do once he was in the situation. Once he was in the enclosure, the only priority should have been to protect the boy at all costs. Human beings alone are created in God’s image and as such have a superior value and dignity over all other creatures. Despite the “outrage” from animal rights supporters, the zoo did the right thing to protect the boy. And I’m glad they did.

Another unhinged asshole . Why do idiots like you think your religious doctrine is universally accepted ?

If it's not, then why are human lives more valuable than gorillas'?

They are not to me.