Originally posted by dadudemonyeah, and it doesn't make sense to me.
Well...kids and animals (yes, I went there) are seen as more innocent and pure than 40 year old adults. Also, the kids have not gotten to live a life, yet. Most 40 year olds have experienced life with an adult mind. I must say that if given the choice between a complete 8 year old stranger and my own life, I'd logical chose the kid's life: I've lived quite a long time the kid should have a chance to at least live as long as I have. But I'm placing value on experience and knowledge that comes from that which is technically an extension of the ontological argument for the existence of God: to exist is better than not to exist. I'm just adding a time-frame in there: to exist longer is better than not to exist.Edit - I think most people are thinking the same thing, but just not in those exact words, when they are saying that dead kids are worse than dead adults.
I don't place value on life based on age, gender, race, intelligence, etc. It's terrible... PERIOD, when people are killed, and to me it comes off as shallow to say it's more tragic when a younger person dies. I especially think it's nonsense because if it were your mother or some random little kid who was about to be gunned down, i seriously doubt you'd want the kid to be spared.
Human life is human life, age shouldn't even be a factor in how you feel about it when it's taken away.
I'm gonna pretend you didn't equate human and animal life.