To save or not to save

Seeing this emaciated dog gets me thinking again on the age-old debate: to save or not to save.

Many people would take a look at the picture and say: for the good of the dog, pls put him down. End his suffering.

On the other side of the fence, many people would take a look and say: now that we found him, pls save him. Give him a chance in life.

Who is right?

No one and everyone?

The power men holds in his hands has twarted the nature of life somewhat. The power to give life and more so, the power to take away life.

Euthansia has become a very convenient, fast, relatively cheap way to take away a life, mostly in the name of ending suffering. Sometimes for the agenda of saving costs. To let some lives go that would otherwise eat up a large chunk of funds.

The power of euthanasia in men's hands is dangerous. It becomes too convenient an option when faced with a tough situation treading thinly between life and death. It becomes too easy to snuff out a life.

It could eventually misguide our heart.

On the other hand, the very cry in us to save an animal sometimes is born out of a hidden sense of pride, a misguided need to feel a sense of accomplishment, to feed our own lack that we hope to draw from a case of 'from near-death to life'. Of 'wow, look what I did, I saved this dog's life!'

We must not look to ourselves if we really claim to have a heart for the animal in need. We have to shut off our emotions that may misguide us into soothing those emotions, rather than to come to a place where we make a decision, at times painful, but always for the ultimate GOOD of the animal.

It is the animal's pain that we must soothe.

For me, if the vet feels that there is a chance of survival, and if the animal shows a sign that he/she is willing to give life another chance, then we, in all capacity, should be that hope which the animal has been waiting for.

Now that he was eventually found.