My comments on 'Whose life is more precious?'

As i was reading your comments, i was pleased by the depth of thinking shown by many of you. Some of you mentioned about the ethical aspect on the value of life while others mentioned about the impact of the king - a good king as opposed to an incompetent king. I, especially enjoyed reading the story posted by one of you that illustrated the worth of a beggar's experience as compared to the king's. Just a comment about the story: Not all kings are bad and not all beggars are good. Many of us like to champion for the underdogs. What do i mean by that? 'Championing for the underdogs' means we like to give our support to people who we think are 'victims'or being treated in a way 'unfairly'. However, to be fair, we must also bear in mind that being a king may not necessary be a blessing as a king is entrusted with heavy responsibility while a beggar lives freely. Imagine having the power and authority to run a country and to be responsible for the lives of many. A beggar is free to live his life. So whose life is more valuable? In my opinion, there is no right or wrong answer. To say that a king's life is more precious will not make you an elitist because in many aspects a king does have a much greater sphere of influence and impact than a beggar. A beggar's decision will only affect his own life and probably his family. A king's decision will affect the lives of millions. Without a king, a country will be without a leader and the consequence is grave. To say that all lives should be treated as equal is not wrong either because indeed, all lives are precious and all lives should be treated equally.