I was thinking it might be a good way for Diamonds02 to make a few extra bucks as a “side hustle” without having to do any work.
Just find people willing to pay you a sum of money while you agree to take care of their pets after they are raptured away into heaven, but before the entire earth is engulfed in flames or whatever.
I think it’s a pretty immoral sort of thing, but if people are stupid enough to pay people for a service they will by definition never be able to verify or appreciate, well, so be it.
Does anyone here pay for pet-care during the rapture services?
Nope, i wouldn’t pay for it, but I am not deluded into believing that at some amorphous random time I would be sucked skyward out of my car and home. Or maybe drop dead when some random sky spirit blows a horn.
If you think it would be a neat way to make money, go for it - just make sure that you do not run afoul of any current company by using their advertising concepts. I would market it more as a novelty than serious - a gift certificate to be given to someone for christmas. Sort of like those baby/pet/dead body on board signs for the window, and the giftee gets registered in your book of business.
But the only people left after the rapture will be atheists, unbelievers, and other heathens (Jews, Muslims, etc). Isn’t this a case where the only people eligible for such a job would be the last ones you should entrust it to? And besides, wouldn’t someone *this *attached to their pet be convinced their pets would go to heaven, as well?
I’m just pissed I didn’t think of this first. Hey, I could still market my services anyway.
“Jackmannii’s Rapture-Tel, where your pets are raised in a God-fearing environment while you groove with the spiritual in-crowd. Belly rubs and Bible-readings for your critters included with the standard bed and board package.”
Good heavens, you’re nearly as bad as the religious types you indirectly criticize. Has it occurred to you that the problem most people have with religious conservatives (the ones most likely to avail themselves of this service) is not any particular belief about the end of the world, but rather their pernicious tendency to believe that their sense of morality entitles them to park their noses in the otherwise free, voluntary, and consensual transactions of others.
As Dr. Fields said, never give a sucker an even break, never lighten up a chump. It might be immoral if you tried to sell them on the rapture happening as opposed to letting them come to you. In this you’d be more moral than their ministers, no doubt.
Besides this, if the prospect of shelling out real money for their fantasy made them consider the odds of getting Raptured any time soon, it might be moral. If they think they will have to deal with global warming and other problems and not get a free pass out of them, they might become better people.
Whenever you raise “moral objections” to something, it seems like it’s just an elaborate artifice for you to say, “This isn’t really any of my business, but I’ve got an opinion on it anyway, and you people need to know what that is.”
Is it moral for other people to spend their money on things that you wouldn’t spend your money on? I don’t know. Have you got any reason to suppose that they give shit as to how you feel about it?
I don’t think he’s arguing that it isn’t moral for people to **pay **for the service, but for people (presumably atheists, or else what’s the point) to create and to sell a service that they (by reasons which should be obvious) don’t actually believe is going to ever require them to fulfill the obligations of the service they’re selling, but which gets them the money up-front.
I think it’s not too out of order to suggest some moralistic implications there.
On the other hand, hey - it’s a free country.
People have labs that will clone your pet for you for truly obscene amounts of money, and they most certainly advertise using the angle that you’ll get your “Fluffly” or “Mittens” back again, good as new. You won’t, of course, and the pet may not (likely not if it’s a cat) even be the same color! But of course it’s all in there correctly in the legal fine print, and no one’s forcing bereaved pet parents to part with scads of dough in the hopes of reuniting with the reincarnation of poor departed Misty. Is that immoral? I dunno - my morals are sketchy at best. But its an interesting thing to think about!
The Church of Colophon heartily endorses this statement.
I’m also prepared to offer last-minute Mayan Apocolaypse insurance - don’t wait till December 21!
Seriously, I consider it a lot less immoral than, say, selling homeopathic “remedies”. I imagine most people running companies that sell that shit know that it’s complete nonsense, and furthermore they know that some people will take it rather than taking proper medicine and may well die or become more ill as a result. Having said that, I have considered setting up such a business myself because something about parting stupid people from their cash appeals to me.
By comparison, charging some bible-bashing bigot 10 bucks a month on the promise you’ll look after Tiny and Tiddles when Jebus calls in the faithful is a positive contribution to the money/marbles equilibrium.
(I should add that if I did ever set up a homeopathy business it would have to be restricted to non-serious conditions, as a sop to the wizened stump of my conscience
I’m just saying, between this and people using craigslist in ways you don’t approve of, you spend a lot of time worrying about how other people are living their lives. It makes you seem kind of lonely.
