Do you believe that every human life holds equal value?

I think it depends on how you define value and it's a dangerous place you wander into when you start arbitrarily setting boundaries about who and who isn't 'worthy' or 'deserving' of life.

If you were to think about people who have furthered the human races progression through the ages (WARNING: controversial opinion incoming) then you could argue that people such as Hitler/Mao/etc did more to further the cause of human existence than, me for instance. While these people may not have been popular, or set out to do good you could evaluate the overall effect on humanity as more meaningful than, say me, who has achieved nothing and changed nothing about the world at all.

Due to circumstances originating from WW2 I would not exist today if it wasn't for Adolf Hitler - I also suspect a great many of us on this forum wouldn't either.

Despite what rhetoric people espouse on this thread about all human life being equal - what people practise in their daily life will be completely different. It is a shame yes, but people are only interested in their own well-being.

abso****inglutely. And, I am outraged about the fact that Obama cried only when his home was attacked. 55,000 children killed by US drone attacks. Shouldn't he have cried for them?!

Maybe we should be working to tackle peoples greed and selfishness rather than just throwing our hands in the air and accepting that we can't change it.

My thoughts exactly, same could be said for the Boston Bombings, it's terrible people did die, but one the same day 33 people died in Iraq. Just cause it's a common thing in Iraq doesn't mean it's different.
That being said, I have to pessimistically say the world has always been like this. Nothing will change unless, we get rid of concepts such as nationalism, social, political and religious collectivism. Basically a revolution of values, but it'll never happen...

Not really. Some people bring good, some bring bad, and some bring nothing at all. I couldn't tell ya who's who, but there are obvious examples Ghandi>Hitler.

Funny you should mention that; Gandhi was a fan of Hitler.

is there any evidence for your ****ty statement?

My thoughts exactly, same could be said for the Boston Bombings, it's terrible people did die, but one the same day 33 people died in Iraq. Just cause it's a common thing in Iraq doesn't mean it's different.
That being said, I have to pessimistically say the world has always been like this. Nothing will change unless, we get rid of concepts such as nationalism, social, political and religious collectivism. Basically a revolution of values, but it'll never happen...

can you explain this statement for me please?

Hitler was ruthlessly efficient in rearranging a country that had previously been brought to its knees by overtaxing and the effects of the great depression, he restructured the economy well and had a good health initiative for his citizens. On top of that he served in WW1 and was very intelligent, as well as great at delivering public speeches. How is he any worse than someone who simply had 'good morals'? If we're looking at this from a utility perspective, Hitler is worth far more than your average joe. He might not have been very nice but he certainly achieved more than somebody with 'good morals', like it or not.

Depends who you ask.

My husband is obese. Not from a medical condition, just through eating too much. Now he's working hard to rectify this and has lost 10 stone so far, but still, he's obese.

Ignorant, above me, would therefore try to say that Einstein's life is of greater value than my husbands. Well maybe to him, yes, but to me, my children, and my in-laws, my husband's life is of far greater value than even Einstein.

Likewise I could argue that Einstein's life is of greater value than Ignorant's mother. However I'm sure Ignorant would disagree.

Your loved ones are always going to be of the greatest value to you, even if they are just ordinary people. Therefore it's entirely subjective.