Humans behaving badly means zoo animals die

[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'?

Quite simple. Because WE are gorillas and THEY are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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'?

Quite simple. Because WE are gorillas and THEY are not.

Who's this "WE" you're referring to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The child was in harm's way being dragged around in such a violent manner. Harambe wasn't doing anything "wrong" but that doesn't mean that the child was safe being dragged around like that. Harambe was being a gorilla and the little boy was an immature 3 year old who didn't know better. And now Harambe is dead and the little boy is injured.

This whole situation is just sickening. How a preschool administrator could be so lax in the supervision of her own child is truly sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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'?

Quite simple. Because WE are gorillas and THEY are not.

Who's this "WE" you're referring to?

WE the gorillas.

Great to see that some of you humans seem to care a bit about us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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'?

Quite simple. Because WE are gorillas and THEY are not.

Who's this "WE" you're referring to?

WE the gorillas.

Great to see that some of you humans seem to care a bit about us.

Speak for yourself, Cornelius.

[Anonymous]

It's been said before. We all have had lapses of judgement where we are distracted "for just a second". That is why babies roll off changing tables, kids fall down stairs, basically, any injury to a kid under 3 or 4 happens when a caregiver is not paying attention. Car accidents also come to mind. If it was your child, what would you want to happen? I think most of us would not have wanted to risk a tranquilizer either agitating the gorilla or taking too long to take effect. The zoo made the right decision.

Yes, the parents should have been paying more attention but they weren't, - they screwed up and a poor gorilla lost its life but most of us have screwed up at some point in our lives and just have been lucky enough to not cause any casualties. Hopefully they learned their lesson. I wish they expressed some sadness for the gorilla and took some of the responsibility. That would have gone a long way to stop all the hate they are getting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's been said before. We all have had lapses of judgement where we are distracted "for just a second". That is why babies roll off changing tables, kids fall down stairs, basically, any injury to a kid under 3 or 4 happens when a caregiver is not paying attention. Car accidents also come to mind. If it was your child, what would you want to happen? I think most of us would not have wanted to risk a tranquilizer either agitating the gorilla or taking too long to take effect. The zoo made the right decision.

Yes, the parents should have been paying more attention but they weren't, - they screwed up and a poor gorilla lost its life but most of us have screwed up at some point in our lives and just have been lucky enough to not cause any casualties. Hopefully they learned their lesson. I wish they expressed some sadness for the gorilla and took some of the responsibility. That would have gone a long way to stop all the hate they are getting.

For how long was the kid unsupervised? Was he able to jump in a matter of seconds, or did it took longer?

[Anonymous]

It's not purely kid life vs. gorilla life though.

It's an unsupervised kid who intentionally wanted to get into the gorilla enclosure. The actions of two individuals (the kid and his mother) resulted in the death of an innocent being. The gorilla did nothing wrong.

If it were an innocent kid who truly accidentally just fell in then it's a different story. But he put himself there. And the mother did nothing to stop it. They are responsible for their actions. The zoo officials should have taken their chances with a tranquilizer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not purely kid life vs. gorilla life though.

It's an unsupervised kid who intentionally wanted to get into the gorilla enclosure. The actions of two individuals (the kid and his mother) resulted in the death of an innocent being. The gorilla did nothing wrong.

If it were an innocent kid who truly accidentally just fell in then it's a different story. But he put himself there. And the mother did nothing to stop it. They are responsible for their actions. The zoo officials should have taken their chances with a tranquilizer.

When can gorillas do anything "wrong"? By what standards, human or gorilla?

And, as it has been pointed out before, tranquilizers take a finite time to take effect, time which an unpredictable wild animal could use to rip a kid to shreds.

[Anonymous]

There is still something fishy to this story. The kid fell 10 feet (15 feet in some accounts) but suffered absolutely no injuries. Also, the kid was not screamig or crying while the gorilla dragged him. Doesn't ring true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is still something fishy to this story. The kid fell 10 feet (15 feet in some accounts) but suffered absolutely no injuries. Also, the kid was not screamig or crying while the gorilla dragged him. Doesn't ring true.

I read that he did have a mild concussion from jumping into the moat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is still something fishy to this story. The kid fell 10 feet (15 feet in some accounts) but suffered absolutely no injuries. Also, the kid was not screamig or crying while the gorilla dragged him. Doesn't ring true.

Do you think the 4 year old is involved in some sort of gorilla conspiracy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not purely kid life vs. gorilla life though.

It's an unsupervised kid who intentionally wanted to get into the gorilla enclosure. The actions of two individuals (the kid and his mother) resulted in the death of an innocent being. The gorilla did nothing wrong.

If it were an innocent kid who truly accidentally just fell in then it's a different story. But he put himself there. And the mother did nothing to stop it. They are responsible for their actions. The zoo officials should have taken their chances with a tranquilizer.

When can gorillas do anything "wrong"? By what standards, human or gorilla?

And, as it has been pointed out before, tranquilizers take a finite time to take effect, time which an unpredictable wild animal could use to rip a kid to shreds.

If the gorilla immediately started beating on the kid. That might be "wrong". By human standards, of course, because he was living in a human world.

And the gorilla may also have left the kid alone. We will never know. Like I said, given the circumstances, they should have taken the risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is still something fishy to this story. The kid fell 10 feet (15 feet in some accounts) but suffered absolutely no injuries. Also, the kid was not screamig or crying while the gorilla dragged him. Doesn't ring true.

Do you think the 4 year old is involved in some sort of gorilla conspiracy?

Both gorilla and kid were black, so sure there's some kind of police conspiracy involved.

Probably that's why they murdered the gorilla.

[Anonymous]

If it weren't for human stupidity, the gorilla wouldn't even be in the zoo in the first place. Wild animals should not be held in captivity for humans' viewing pleasure and amusement. They should be left in the wild where they belong. If not for the humans who enslaved this beautiful creature, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.