Poll: Is a Childs Life more Valuable then a Adults ?

[Zersy]

This is in general so no "It depends" .

A child still has alot to live for with alot fo potential then again so does a adult, a child may seem innocent but so can a adult.

It's a tough decision, Think of yourself in the position where you had to choose between the life of a Adult and the life of a Child (say your pointing a gun) , which one would you think has more right to live ?

 

[ethaninja]

Ok, I'm assuming the child and adult have both equal amount of intelligence or potential intelligence... I would go the Child. As he has a longer life ahead of him.

 

[sylekage]

It all depends. How old is the child and the adult? what's their family position? what's the adult done in life? to many factors to consider

 

[leeloodallasmultipass]

i think assumptions are usually made upon the idea that every and each child is Born innocent until indoctrinated/corrupted.

The idea usually carries on into these Death of a Child moments. where they are deemed to be innocent beings that didn't bring anything upon themselves.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

The child, unless it's ginger.

Disclaimer: I'm joking, of course. I have lots of ginger friends and relatives and even know one hot ginger girl

 

[Eri]

There are too many factors just say one or the other. Is the adult Einstein and the child, some random? Is the child a prodigy or is the adult a hobo?

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

Like others have said, there are so many things to take into account to make an educated decision. Instinct however, would make me save the child.

 

[tzimize]

Depends what you mean by value.
To society a child has more value since it will (most likely) grow up to be a productive member and keep the cash-flow running. An adult has played out a lot of his value (depending on his age). This would be a socioeconomic value I guess.

If you are talking moral value its impossible to tell since morals are rooted in opinion instead of fact.

 

[TriggerHappyAngel]

is say no; a life is a life and age doesn't matter.

 

[MurderousToaster]

*than, not then.

It depends on the child's potential for its' life.

 

[Chester41585]

You can always make more unskilled people in less time it takes to make trained people with definite skill sets. I've always measured current value over potential value.

 

[Jamash]

A child's life is seen as more sacred than an adult's life because they are less capable of defending themselves, and because they're more innocent (they've had less chance to commit sins and crimes which would justify their death).

 

[Craftybonds]

From a biological standpoint, always kill the child, if the adult is under the age of 40 (maybe 50?)

An adult can immediately produce offspring, replacing the child with relative ease. the adult generally has a higher value over the child anyway, unless we're playing these roles with gomer pile and Doogie Howser. going back to the offspring thing; if the adult is sterile, then kill the adult.

If this is more of a question on morals: then i say fuck morals. anyone in their right mind should save 30 years worth of work over 5.

EDIT: spelling, typos, etc.

 

[iLikeHippos]

I'd rather shoot an adult Saint who have never committed a sin in his life...
Than a small boy who's addicted on sniffing glue and will only live 1 more year (if lucky).

 

[Axzarious]

From a biological standpoint, always the adult, if the adult is under the age of 40 (maybe 50?)

An adult can immediately produce offspring, immediately replacing the child. the adult generally has a higher value over the child anyway, unless we're playing these roles with gomer pile and Doogie Howser. going back to the offspring thing; if the adult is sterile, then kill the adult.

If this is more of a question on morals: then i say fuck morals. anyone in their right mind should save 30 years worth of work over 5.

EDIT: spelling, typos, etc.

As cold as it may seem, you have a glaringly obvious point for the peramiters for this question. You have the best point.

Another ironic tidbit or peice of information to think about, is that all life is DNA, which, at its core, the sole purpose of which self replication, regardless of form. You could argue that killing either one does not matter in any way, and killing the entire human species will not really matter in the grand scheme... Heck, it would probably allow DNA to replicate longer before we are in a toxic wasteland from either war, our own filth, or whatnot..... The world will eventually belong to rats, roaches, and microbes... Our species is slowly circling the drain, and we will eventually kill ourselves off... If we dont make drastic changes... And i'm talking about more than being green.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Meh, I'd kill 'em both just to be fair.

Though I think im more inclined to sparing the child depending on what age s/he's in. Most adults are guilty of some crap in the world and most likely deserve som epunishment for it. Kids below a certain age however are more innocent in that regard. They just haven't had the time to fuck too much up yet...

 

[hpv]

Then adults what?