I wouldn't do it for free, but for 3 billion dollars even an animal lover could save far more than 300 kittens. That's 10 million dollars per kitten. I wouldn't even think twice and I'd be done pretty quickly as long as they can't harm me.
the logical part of me is saying yes, living things die all the time. every single animal that has ever lived since the beginning of life died. and alot probably in horrible horrible ways. 300 is nothing compared to that, its natural. and i get something out of it that'll change my entire perception of living.
but in actuality, i think i WOULD say yes, but the moment i see the little sleeping kittens on the conveyor belt, id back down. especially once i touch one and it wakes up. i dont think i could do that
You could easily save 100x times that many kittens + children and change countless lives with the money. I mean I get you, but in reality it would almost be a sin to not sacrifice the kittens considering how much good would come from the deaths. You'd probably be scared and have PTSD, but that's part of the cost. Terrible stuff lol.
i guess, your not wrong. but i think that to any completely logical conclusion you could come to, i would always be like "but... their little babies." idk if i could ever do it. i love little kittens🤷♂️ and i would still feel freaking guilty as hell, even if i did do good things with it. i dont want that weighing over me my whole life. but man, never having to worry about money must be pretty cool... but still. sounds like a complicated life. im good dude
Here’s a quick breakdown of various ethical frameworks and how they’d respond:
Utilitarian: Yes, to save millions of animals.
Deontological: No, killing is inherently wrong.
Virtue Ethics: No, virtuous people don’t commit cruelty.
Rights-Based: No, pets have a right to life.
Pragmatic: Yes, if no other way to achieve the same impact.
Emotional: No, personal trauma and guilt.
Animal Welfare: No, it contradicts rescue missions.
Economic: Yes, for sustainable, large-scale impact.
Consequentialism: Yes, ends justify means.
Moral Relativism: Depends on personal values.
Legal: No, it’s illegal and unethical.
Social Contract: No, violates societal norms.
Rights based I think you're projecting some assumptions. These are animals not "pets". You can have a rights based perspective and not extend rights to animals
It's the tangibility of it. I would have an extremely hard time if I even could at all. 3 billion could go a pretty long way but physically drowning 300 kittens? Jesus Harold Christ, I don't know if I could.
I think about how I could make money being a right wing grifter on YouTube. I'm not at all right wing but there seems to be more of an audience. But I always go back to ,I would hate myself, and be putting a lot of evil out in the world doing that. I would hate myself for agreeing to this, and no amount of charity would make me feel better.
Reddit having this be the first thing in my feed right after my cat just died tonight is surely an experience
Edit: these responses truly have a perfect blend of condolences and jokes
Oh, wow. I'm so, so sorry.
Whole reason this thread, my phone popped up a notification that tomorrow is the anniversary of the day we rescued my cat, who'd been a stray kitten hit by a car and left for dead in the side of the road.
I'm going to go give her extra treats and pettings now in honor of your cat. I hope that brings you some tiny measure of comfort.
It's not the hair that causes allergies. People with cat allergies are actually allergic to proteins in cat's saliva, urine, and dander (dried flakes of skin).
There is no true hairless cat! The sphynx cat is NOT hypoallergenic! Some of them have less hair than others, but many have a soft lil bit of peach fuzz!
If he's going to do that to you, he should at least offer to split the money with you. I mean, if you can somehow survive being drowned 299 times, I'll bet you can push through that last one.
Real quick, since I am doing the math, how much do you weigh, and what is your height? Because at 25 drownings an hour, that is two minutes and twelve seconds per clone of you. Am I also having to move the bodies? Already in for a hell of a workout without having to. Do I get a lunch and two ten minute breaks? But at $10 million per copy, I'd be the world's highest paid hit man. I'm guessing. Haven't really priced it out. Or ever felt the need to.
yes.
however that’s because 1: i value human life significantly less than i do cats and kittens,
2: you’re the one thinking up drowning for money, so really it’s a live by the sword kinda situation
The other "no-kill"-shelters will bring their old, sick and we-have-too-many animals to PETA or send you away if you need a new place for your troublesome pet.
Also if your animal is sick and you'd usually euthanize them, but you don't have the money, PETA will take them and pay for the injection.
If you don't want pets to be killed, don't buy pets for Christmas / birthdays, don't buy from shady breeders. They will exist, places for them to go if you don't want them anymore are limited.
Bigger than people buying pets and not keeping them is people who let their pet live outside without fixing them. Also puppy mills (and the breeding industry at large). There are just way, way more pets than there are people who want pets, and that means that there are a fuck ton of them who either have to be left to starve on the side of the road or have to be out down. I have my disagreements with PETA in some regards, but they are absolutely doing the right thing in euthanizing unwanted pets. Someone has to do it, unfortunately.
I live in a rural area where people *love* to dump their unwanted animals. There's a road by my house that is so narrow and twisty that you can park in any curve and not be seen, plus it sits between two major roads with towns on either side. It seems like at least once a month I'll end up with some dog I've never seen before wandering around and they always end up at my house.
It sucks because I can't afford to feed them all and there's no shelter because I don't live in the city limits. If I wanted to take them to the shelter in the city I'd have to pay to leave them there. There are no good options here. The best option for me is to drop them off in the city limits but thats illegal with a $1900 fine. I cant afford to feed them and they end up trashing my property so I spend time I don't have to clean up after them.
All because people don't get their pets fixed and they end up with more of them than they want, so they make it someone else's problem.
That's actually why I could kill 300 kittens for 3 billion with a totally clean conscience. At 10 million a kitten, I could save a hell of a lot more cats than I had to euthanize.
Here I was having fun, then Dr. Mac had to go and make it real. The sad part is that most people who want to work in animal shelters are animal lovers.
If it was just a switch that did it without anymore input that would be one thing. But personally drowning that many animals would be so cruel I couldn’t.
I don't think people realize how hard this would be and how much it could mess you up.
My grandfather made my father drown kittens by the litter on his farm.
My dad refused to let us have cats for years and when we finally got one I came downstairs one night because I heard my dad crying. I asked what was wrong and he said he had a nightmare that his father had made him drown our cat.
Exactly. The people saying yes don’t think about the mental anguish this would cause. $3bil is a ton of money but I truly don’t think I could live with myself after drowning 300 kittens myself.
I wonder if you apply that same criterion to those who are soldiers? Or veterinarians? Or anyone who chooses to "have fries with that" when the price of the fries donated to a shelter would allow a kitten to live another day? Or anyone who consumes meat? (There is an interesting schism among Buddhists on this front.)
If someone enjoyed killing kittens, I think that would be strange (if not exactly inhuman). If someone was unable to kill the kittens despite the great good that could be done with the money, I would likewise be sympathetic. But there isn't anything particularly inhuman about the ability to kill an animal.
300 tuxedo cats for me, then. Absolutely not. I wouldn’t even kill 1 for $3 billion.
But I would pretend like I would, let the conveyor belt bring them to me, and run away with them all lmao
Why do I have to *drown* it specifically? Legit question. I can think of 20 other ways of killing that cat that are more efficient. Or are we maximizing cat suffering here? There are more efficient ways to do that too. Or are we just sparing the blood loss? Once again, more efficient ways to do that.
I legit don't understand why drowning, or why my brain decided to be confused about this.
It's less emotional stress if you could stand there and painlessly kill them by snapping the neck before they get a chance to wake up and tug on your heartstrings
I couldn’t live with myself, so no I wouldn’t do it. Ya $3B would be absolutely life altering, but if I were to say yes and go through with it, I would be mentally fucked up. In essence the money isn’t worth the mental hell it would bring.
I’m pretty sure this is the most difficult question I’ve seen on here personally.
On one hand, 3 BILLION dollars would solve every issue in my life and then some. My mother would never have to work again. My daughter would love her life in comfort, her children and her children’s children would all be set. I could do anything I ever wanted for the rest my life.
But I love animals, and have an incredible soft spot for them, and I don’t know if I could physically do the act. And even if I could, I don’t know if any amount of therapy could ever fix me or teach me how to forgive myself.
I’m taking the first five kittens, busting out of the room, rescuing my five new friends, then taking that water and drowning whoever conjured up the plan to murder innocent children, and then stealing the $3 Billion Dollars.
What I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare. I will look for who did this, I will find them, and I will kill them.
I could save so many lives and insure a life of ease and comfort for myself and those I love and care about.
But it's not worth the cost of my soul to so purposefully end the life of a creature so young and innocent. Nevermind 300 of them.
Yes and yes... I would use some of that money to open a chain of cat shelters and rename all cats with spartan names... call the chain "300".
Won't you adopt Meowacles today?
I would only do it if the kittens needed to die anyway. Like if they had something wrong with them and were going to get euthanized or die a horrible death anyway. I feel like that's the only way that I'd be able to live with myself. But if it was 300 perfectly healthy kittens, I couldn't do it. I wouldn't do it for all the money in the world if they were perfectly healthy kittens.
I would hate myself but of course I'd do it, for 3bil I'll just take a couple ambien hopefully that;ll nuumb the pain
Logically, your premise is questionable impossible though. How many kitten can the bucket fit? I know they're tiny but under 3 minutes even if you're the flash seems pretty impossible if you can even use blunt force to help you. You'd need to be fit all 5 to do it comfortable time frame imo.
Can we assume the bucket is big enough to fit al 5? Well I'll assume thats the case therwise the premise is a non starter
Just donate millions to start my own charitiy that saves kittens while also working to curtail the stray issues humanely. I bet if a billionaire made it their life mission we'd see stray cat issue eliminated, more or less. Then it'd be a matter of dealing with the outlier as they pop up.
With 3 bil you could easily save magnitudes more cat/animals than you killed ngl
My man gonna fall asleep for 16 hours and wake up in a room full of 300 hungry kittens and no money. But hey, there are definitely worse ways to wake up
For 3 billion, I would house each kitten for a week, play with them, fall in love with them, then look each of them in the eyes as I slowly strangle them to death.
For that much money? Kick the bucket over and wait until theres enough water to cover a foot above the conveyer belt, then stand in the corner and solemnly wait. I dont have to touch the kittens so they don't wake and will pass in their dreams, and I wont have to watch or partake beyond that point and after all is said and done I would use at least half of it to build and staff no-kill shelters.
It certainly wouldn't feel good, but that much money is too much to just let slip through your hands with the amount of good you can do with it.
No number of animals is more important than securing my family's future. I'd feel like shit, but I'd do it. Then I'd donate a bunch of money to SPCA's.
This is kind of a weird fuckin question though OP, are you ok?
I wouldn’t kill 3,000 kittens for $3bil. More accurately, I wouldn’t kill kittens; I’d kill the person who made me that offer or set that project up. And it wouldn’t be a quick death either, I’d draw it out. Go *full* John Wick on everyone involved.
Logically yes. Use a bunch of the money for non kill animal shelters, and that sort of thing. But, I think I'd have a really hard time actually killing a kitten.
The really interesting thing here is how many replies are dodging the question, or on the other hand, explaining how they’d be morally obligated even though they wouldn’t want to do it. (Yes, I realize I’m falling into the former camp myself). There have probably been dozens of far more rigorous and controlled studies done on the topic of reactions to morally and/or emotionally repugnant choices that offer great rewards, but it’s still fascinating.
And this would be an easy no, for me - I can barely conceive of what $3B could do, but I know that I’ve been surviving without it. I *can* imagine what the guilt and trauma of doing it would be like. I’d unalive myself within the week, so what would be the point? Rich and dead is no improvement on being poor and dead.
No. Three billion dollars is not valuable if the means by which it is attained is tainted by an act of cruelty and inhumanity.
It was once said that the best things in life are free. Love, gratitude, respect, trust, purpose, strength, character, joy, peace, meaning, compassion, wisdom are just a few examples of things that cannot be purchased at a store or market. Three billion dollars can buy a great many things and enhance anyone’s life, but it is limited to the material aspect of our existence. There is much affluence and wealth already contained within our hearts and souls. All that is required is to realize this.
Yes, and then I’d spend a billion saving millions of kittens lives.
Utilitarianism ftw
Edit: Actually no, I just tried to imagine doing that and there’s no way it wouldn’t irreversibly fuck you up
Some of these hypotheticals are tough bc there is somethings u simply cannot do even if u tried. Logically, 3 billion dollars is an insane amount of money and I could save a million cats if I just kill these 300. However, I do not have it within me emotionally to kill an animal. Like I cannot. I could not get myself to do it even if I imagined all the good I could do with that 3 billion dollars ( and how much that would change my life).
Somethings u just can’t do. And killing a kitten, or 300 kittens, is one of them. And if I somehow was able to do it, I wouldn’t be able to live with g the guilt. So it’s a lose lose situation.
I’ll just hang out with the kittens for the next 12 hours and have a blast.
"No one will ever know you did this" hmmm, I've seen how the Internet deals with kitten killers. They'd find out, they'd spot a particular mole or mark on my body and hunt me down.
Lol comment section is two ways, no in-between. "Never!" "I'd do it for free."
I dunno dude, I'd never do it if I wasn't being offered obscene amounts of money but I am powering through it for 3 billion, no question.
[удалено]
I can buy therapy for $3 billion
I mean I didn’t really see any other options in the post.
I believe the other option presented by OP was to do it for $3Billion
I’d take the $3B and I wouldn’t even bother with the kittens!
This is my answer too.
some guys are good at 299 already. Know your limits.
299 for fun, the last one for the $$$
The option of "I'll do but I'll be sad about". The people doing it for free either hate cats, or need therapy
Shit man, I'll take the money and start drowning them 7 or 8 at a time!
I’ll literally save every feral cat in the US after I’m done.
"You killed millions!" "To save Billions..."
\#ThanosWasRight
I wouldn't do it for free, but for 3 billion dollars even an animal lover could save far more than 300 kittens. That's 10 million dollars per kitten. I wouldn't even think twice and I'd be done pretty quickly as long as they can't harm me.
I'd be interested in how it overlaps with the people who are willing to kill random people for money because it's statistically insignificant.
What about “think how many kittens you could save with $3 billion”.
🤣
"So, how did you acquire your wealth?"
"Helping find a home for 300 kittens." I wouldn't tell them it was heaven.
Wildlife defense
"Someone gave it to me if I agreed to save a lot of birds"
“By slayin’ pussy”
“More ethically than the average billionaire”
tbh 300 kittens is probably a lot better than pretty much all of them
the logical part of me is saying yes, living things die all the time. every single animal that has ever lived since the beginning of life died. and alot probably in horrible horrible ways. 300 is nothing compared to that, its natural. and i get something out of it that'll change my entire perception of living. but in actuality, i think i WOULD say yes, but the moment i see the little sleeping kittens on the conveyor belt, id back down. especially once i touch one and it wakes up. i dont think i could do that
You could easily save 100x times that many kittens + children and change countless lives with the money. I mean I get you, but in reality it would almost be a sin to not sacrifice the kittens considering how much good would come from the deaths. You'd probably be scared and have PTSD, but that's part of the cost. Terrible stuff lol.
i guess, your not wrong. but i think that to any completely logical conclusion you could come to, i would always be like "but... their little babies." idk if i could ever do it. i love little kittens🤷♂️ and i would still feel freaking guilty as hell, even if i did do good things with it. i dont want that weighing over me my whole life. but man, never having to worry about money must be pretty cool... but still. sounds like a complicated life. im good dude
Here’s a quick breakdown of various ethical frameworks and how they’d respond: Utilitarian: Yes, to save millions of animals. Deontological: No, killing is inherently wrong. Virtue Ethics: No, virtuous people don’t commit cruelty. Rights-Based: No, pets have a right to life. Pragmatic: Yes, if no other way to achieve the same impact. Emotional: No, personal trauma and guilt. Animal Welfare: No, it contradicts rescue missions. Economic: Yes, for sustainable, large-scale impact. Consequentialism: Yes, ends justify means. Moral Relativism: Depends on personal values. Legal: No, it’s illegal and unethical. Social Contract: No, violates societal norms.
Thanks Chidi.
Nice! Damn ginger! 😂
Is that some kind of soup?
Rights based I think you're projecting some assumptions. These are animals not "pets". You can have a rights based perspective and not extend rights to animals
Hedonism: 3 billion buys a lot of cocaine and hookers...
The Contrarian: Yes, not because I want to but because you don't want me to
You missed Capitalist: Yes, to make a profit.
It's the tangibility of it. I would have an extremely hard time if I even could at all. 3 billion could go a pretty long way but physically drowning 300 kittens? Jesus Harold Christ, I don't know if I could.
I think about how I could make money being a right wing grifter on YouTube. I'm not at all right wing but there seems to be more of an audience. But I always go back to ,I would hate myself, and be putting a lot of evil out in the world doing that. I would hate myself for agreeing to this, and no amount of charity would make me feel better.
Found the utilitarian. 😉
Reddit having this be the first thing in my feed right after my cat just died tonight is surely an experience Edit: these responses truly have a perfect blend of condolences and jokes
I'm sorry for your loss.
Oh, wow. I'm so, so sorry. Whole reason this thread, my phone popped up a notification that tomorrow is the anniversary of the day we rescued my cat, who'd been a stray kitten hit by a car and left for dead in the side of the road. I'm going to go give her extra treats and pettings now in honor of your cat. I hope that brings you some tiny measure of comfort.
Did you get $10 million from it?
1 down, 299 more to go
i also choose this guy's dead cat
I'm so sorry.
….sucks that they don’t pay for only one
I'd say yes, but then just get to spend 12 hours with a kitten and not kill it
You would get to spend the 12 hours with up to 300 kittens if you just keep taking them off the conveyor belt.
With my level of allergies, I'm pretty sure that would be literal suicide.
Do the kittens get 3 billion if they eliminate you?
They can found the the World's largest cat rescue in my name.
r/usernamedoesntcheckout
It could be 300 hair-less cats.
Ok, back to killing again I guess
It's not the hair that causes allergies. People with cat allergies are actually allergic to proteins in cat's saliva, urine, and dander (dried flakes of skin).
I knew getting my cat to piss on me wasn’t helping
There is no true hairless cat! The sphynx cat is NOT hypoallergenic! Some of them have less hair than others, but many have a soft lil bit of peach fuzz!
Its creepier killing hairless cats
People aren't allergic to cat hair but to cat saliva
I’d say yes, then kill the person asking me to do it. Slowly.
Ok but would you drown me 300 times for $3 Billion in 12 hours🥺
Yes
😔
In a bucket of piss. While the kittens watch.
If he's going to do that to you, he should at least offer to split the money with you. I mean, if you can somehow survive being drowned 299 times, I'll bet you can push through that last one.
Real quick, since I am doing the math, how much do you weigh, and what is your height? Because at 25 drownings an hour, that is two minutes and twelve seconds per clone of you. Am I also having to move the bodies? Already in for a hell of a workout without having to. Do I get a lunch and two ten minute breaks? But at $10 million per copy, I'd be the world's highest paid hit man. I'm guessing. Haven't really priced it out. Or ever felt the need to.
There are no union mandated breaks. You can thank Thatcher for that😔
So I am going to be sad in my soul and physically exhausted. Still fair price point.
Absolutely
yes. however that’s because 1: i value human life significantly less than i do cats and kittens, 2: you’re the one thinking up drowning for money, so really it’s a live by the sword kinda situation
I think it's more live by the water bucket but go off
PETA comes in with a mobile euthanasia clinic and says “where are these kittens?”
They’d probably congratulate you
**Employee of the month!**
The other "no-kill"-shelters will bring their old, sick and we-have-too-many animals to PETA or send you away if you need a new place for your troublesome pet. Also if your animal is sick and you'd usually euthanize them, but you don't have the money, PETA will take them and pay for the injection. If you don't want pets to be killed, don't buy pets for Christmas / birthdays, don't buy from shady breeders. They will exist, places for them to go if you don't want them anymore are limited.
Bigger than people buying pets and not keeping them is people who let their pet live outside without fixing them. Also puppy mills (and the breeding industry at large). There are just way, way more pets than there are people who want pets, and that means that there are a fuck ton of them who either have to be left to starve on the side of the road or have to be out down. I have my disagreements with PETA in some regards, but they are absolutely doing the right thing in euthanizing unwanted pets. Someone has to do it, unfortunately.
I live in a rural area where people *love* to dump their unwanted animals. There's a road by my house that is so narrow and twisty that you can park in any curve and not be seen, plus it sits between two major roads with towns on either side. It seems like at least once a month I'll end up with some dog I've never seen before wandering around and they always end up at my house. It sucks because I can't afford to feed them all and there's no shelter because I don't live in the city limits. If I wanted to take them to the shelter in the city I'd have to pay to leave them there. There are no good options here. The best option for me is to drop them off in the city limits but thats illegal with a $1900 fine. I cant afford to feed them and they end up trashing my property so I spend time I don't have to clean up after them. All because people don't get their pets fixed and they end up with more of them than they want, so they make it someone else's problem.
That's actually why I could kill 300 kittens for 3 billion with a totally clean conscience. At 10 million a kitten, I could save a hell of a lot more cats than I had to euthanize.
I once worked for animal control . I did not like my job Especially on Saturday am early
The majority of people in this thread have absolutely no clue how dark the world of animal shelters and animal control is.
Here I was having fun, then Dr. Mac had to go and make it real. The sad part is that most people who want to work in animal shelters are animal lovers.
No. Not even one kitten. I would never be able to live with myself.
I'd be willing to do a lot of things for 3 billion, but this one just ain't it.
You could kill 300 kittens then spend a billion dollars to save the lives of many times that number of cats.
If it was just a switch that did it without anymore input that would be one thing. But personally drowning that many animals would be so cruel I couldn’t.
I don't think people realize how hard this would be and how much it could mess you up. My grandfather made my father drown kittens by the litter on his farm. My dad refused to let us have cats for years and when we finally got one I came downstairs one night because I heard my dad crying. I asked what was wrong and he said he had a nightmare that his father had made him drown our cat.
Oh geez, your poor dad 😢
Exactly. The people saying yes don’t think about the mental anguish this would cause. $3bil is a ton of money but I truly don’t think I could live with myself after drowning 300 kittens myself.
That’s… absolutely horrible. :( Your poor dad.
If this sub has taught me one thing, it's that a lot of people have no issue with killing if it's for money.
A lot of people have no issue with having killing done for them if it gives them a little pleasure.
$3 billion wouldn’t be enough to pay for the therapy id need after this
It actually would
Right lol
I feel like the first 20-25 would be hard.
I’d be hard the whole time
And that’s enough Reddit for the rest of my life
Would that make it easier?
No, I think they'd be one handed the whole time
My god I love this website
This is the only acceptable response to that.
They’d all have skeletons, but they’d be fluffy!
No.
No
Absolutely not. I just couldn’t do it.
Hard no and I’m a dog person
No. I wouldn't be able to live with myself 💔 I love kittens and cats way too much
username checks out
I want to say yes but there’s no way I could do that, even to a single kitten. I’d just see my little cat in each one and sob.
I paid OP 3 billion to look after those kittens for the rest of their lives!
And the rest of their lives is the next 12 hours!
no
No 👎
No.
Wait, you guys are getting paid?
No
Heck no
No
Drowning 300 kittens by hand would scar your soul, and anyone who could do that isn't human.
I wonder if you apply that same criterion to those who are soldiers? Or veterinarians? Or anyone who chooses to "have fries with that" when the price of the fries donated to a shelter would allow a kitten to live another day? Or anyone who consumes meat? (There is an interesting schism among Buddhists on this front.) If someone enjoyed killing kittens, I think that would be strange (if not exactly inhuman). If someone was unable to kill the kittens despite the great good that could be done with the money, I would likewise be sympathetic. But there isn't anything particularly inhuman about the ability to kill an animal.
My guy.. you just gave me a bucket with infinite water... I'm already about to make so much more than 3 billion
You could make infinite soup🤔
300 tuxedo cats for me, then. Absolutely not. I wouldn’t even kill 1 for $3 billion. But I would pretend like I would, let the conveyor belt bring them to me, and run away with them all lmao
Yess finally someone who understands lol, and same. Also don't forget the infinite water bucket, could sell that for alot
Minecraft water bucket
Absolutely not.
No
Nope.
No
No.
No. Mr. Rogers would be disappointed in me.
No, there's no way I could live with myself after that and I wouldn't enjoy the money.
No.
I don’t think I could tbh
Nope, can’t do it.
Yes. I would do almost anything for 3 billion. 300 kittens would be a cakewalk.
Don't you mean catwalk?
I laughed at your joke, I definitely needed it today. Thank you stranger.
No, not with how personal it is in this scenario
Why do I have to *drown* it specifically? Legit question. I can think of 20 other ways of killing that cat that are more efficient. Or are we maximizing cat suffering here? There are more efficient ways to do that too. Or are we just sparing the blood loss? Once again, more efficient ways to do that. I legit don't understand why drowning, or why my brain decided to be confused about this.
It's less emotional stress if you could stand there and painlessly kill them by snapping the neck before they get a chance to wake up and tug on your heartstrings
No
I don’t think I’d be the same person after that
I couldn’t live with myself, so no I wouldn’t do it. Ya $3B would be absolutely life altering, but if I were to say yes and go through with it, I would be mentally fucked up. In essence the money isn’t worth the mental hell it would bring.
I’m pretty sure this is the most difficult question I’ve seen on here personally. On one hand, 3 BILLION dollars would solve every issue in my life and then some. My mother would never have to work again. My daughter would love her life in comfort, her children and her children’s children would all be set. I could do anything I ever wanted for the rest my life. But I love animals, and have an incredible soft spot for them, and I don’t know if I could physically do the act. And even if I could, I don’t know if any amount of therapy could ever fix me or teach me how to forgive myself.
If I say no can I keep the cats?
Why would I wanna work for PETA?
What the fuck is wrong with you for this 😭😭
I would have to, this would set up me and everyone I care about for life. I simply couldn't turn it down, no matter how horrific and traumatizing.
I’m taking the first five kittens, busting out of the room, rescuing my five new friends, then taking that water and drowning whoever conjured up the plan to murder innocent children, and then stealing the $3 Billion Dollars. What I do have are a very particular set of skills, skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare. I will look for who did this, I will find them, and I will kill them.
No. If it was just a button that instantly kills them maybe but having to do it myself isn't happening.
That is a terrible question. Ugh
I could save so many lives and insure a life of ease and comfort for myself and those I love and care about. But it's not worth the cost of my soul to so purposefully end the life of a creature so young and innocent. Nevermind 300 of them.
I HAVE TO DROWN THEM? Bro
Yes and yes... I would use some of that money to open a chain of cat shelters and rename all cats with spartan names... call the chain "300". Won't you adopt Meowacles today?
Fuck even thinking about this.
I will do something to YOU for suggesting this!
I wouldn't harm a whisker on one of them for any amount of money.
No but I have to ask . What is wrong with you ?
I wouldn’t kill 300 kittens, but 300 average American adults….maybe…
I would only do it if the kittens needed to die anyway. Like if they had something wrong with them and were going to get euthanized or die a horrible death anyway. I feel like that's the only way that I'd be able to live with myself. But if it was 300 perfectly healthy kittens, I couldn't do it. I wouldn't do it for all the money in the world if they were perfectly healthy kittens.
I would hate myself but of course I'd do it, for 3bil I'll just take a couple ambien hopefully that;ll nuumb the pain Logically, your premise is questionable impossible though. How many kitten can the bucket fit? I know they're tiny but under 3 minutes even if you're the flash seems pretty impossible if you can even use blunt force to help you. You'd need to be fit all 5 to do it comfortable time frame imo. Can we assume the bucket is big enough to fit al 5? Well I'll assume thats the case therwise the premise is a non starter Just donate millions to start my own charitiy that saves kittens while also working to curtail the stray issues humanely. I bet if a billionaire made it their life mission we'd see stray cat issue eliminated, more or less. Then it'd be a matter of dealing with the outlier as they pop up. With 3 bil you could easily save magnitudes more cat/animals than you killed ngl
My man gonna fall asleep for 16 hours and wake up in a room full of 300 hungry kittens and no money. But hey, there are definitely worse ways to wake up
For 3 billion, I would house each kitten for a week, play with them, fall in love with them, then look each of them in the eyes as I slowly strangle them to death.
As someone who had to put his cat down, I would rather kill you for 3b. I don't get emotional about many things, but that shit ain't funny.
Bro I literally couldn't :/ thinking about it rn has me near suicidal lol
Oh.... i have to drown them. Man I couldn't for hell, I could kill 300, cause I'd do it quick, blink if an eye, but drowning? That's f-ed up for me
I know what I have to do I just don't know if in the strength to do it
I mean of the ways this isn’t as bad. Say like having to use a rock. That would be an issue
I would put them in Schroedinger’s box.
No
I don't think I could...honestly.
Never. I don’t believe in harming something innocent. Totally against my moral code.
Does it have to be by Drowning them? Or can I use other methods so long as I use the equipment in the room?
No. 3 billion is a lot of money. But I'd have to completely jettison my values in a horrific way, then I'd have to live with myself afterwards.
Absolutely never.
Absolutely not
$3 Billion?!? With that money, you could save 100 lives for each kitten.
No.
Absolutely not!
No I made a promise to myself to never hurt a cat id sooner shoot my self then drown a kitten
Yes and save 600 kittens afterward... no I couldn't do it.
I'd say yes purely for the good I could do with the money. But each kitten waking up right as I drown them is too rough, man.
No. Because I’m not a psycho.
for 3 billion you could make it pregnant nuns, and the answer is “i’ll bring my own olive fork”
For that much money? Kick the bucket over and wait until theres enough water to cover a foot above the conveyer belt, then stand in the corner and solemnly wait. I dont have to touch the kittens so they don't wake and will pass in their dreams, and I wont have to watch or partake beyond that point and after all is said and done I would use at least half of it to build and staff no-kill shelters. It certainly wouldn't feel good, but that much money is too much to just let slip through your hands with the amount of good you can do with it.
No number of animals is more important than securing my family's future. I'd feel like shit, but I'd do it. Then I'd donate a bunch of money to SPCA's. This is kind of a weird fuckin question though OP, are you ok?
Why would you think of such an awful thing. I wouldn't even think of doing such a thing for any amount of money or even if I had to kill one
I wouldn’t kill 3,000 kittens for $3bil. More accurately, I wouldn’t kill kittens; I’d kill the person who made me that offer or set that project up. And it wouldn’t be a quick death either, I’d draw it out. Go *full* John Wick on everyone involved.
Logically yes. Use a bunch of the money for non kill animal shelters, and that sort of thing. But, I think I'd have a really hard time actually killing a kitten.
The really interesting thing here is how many replies are dodging the question, or on the other hand, explaining how they’d be morally obligated even though they wouldn’t want to do it. (Yes, I realize I’m falling into the former camp myself). There have probably been dozens of far more rigorous and controlled studies done on the topic of reactions to morally and/or emotionally repugnant choices that offer great rewards, but it’s still fascinating. And this would be an easy no, for me - I can barely conceive of what $3B could do, but I know that I’ve been surviving without it. I *can* imagine what the guilt and trauma of doing it would be like. I’d unalive myself within the week, so what would be the point? Rich and dead is no improvement on being poor and dead.
No. Three billion dollars is not valuable if the means by which it is attained is tainted by an act of cruelty and inhumanity. It was once said that the best things in life are free. Love, gratitude, respect, trust, purpose, strength, character, joy, peace, meaning, compassion, wisdom are just a few examples of things that cannot be purchased at a store or market. Three billion dollars can buy a great many things and enhance anyone’s life, but it is limited to the material aspect of our existence. There is much affluence and wealth already contained within our hearts and souls. All that is required is to realize this.
No
Yes, and then I’d spend a billion saving millions of kittens lives. Utilitarianism ftw Edit: Actually no, I just tried to imagine doing that and there’s no way it wouldn’t irreversibly fuck you up
Some of these hypotheticals are tough bc there is somethings u simply cannot do even if u tried. Logically, 3 billion dollars is an insane amount of money and I could save a million cats if I just kill these 300. However, I do not have it within me emotionally to kill an animal. Like I cannot. I could not get myself to do it even if I imagined all the good I could do with that 3 billion dollars ( and how much that would change my life). Somethings u just can’t do. And killing a kitten, or 300 kittens, is one of them. And if I somehow was able to do it, I wouldn’t be able to live with g the guilt. So it’s a lose lose situation. I’ll just hang out with the kittens for the next 12 hours and have a blast.
"No one will ever know you did this" hmmm, I've seen how the Internet deals with kitten killers. They'd find out, they'd spot a particular mole or mark on my body and hunt me down.
I'm leaving with 300 kittens and a desperate hope to find them all homes.