i would argue that the lives of people, even people who use text speak when not sending a text, have the same basic human rights. value is subjective and i would not try to assess it. i value some individuals in my life more than others but that doesn't mean i think one has more of a right to live, be free or pursue happiness, although freedom is not for, say, psychopathic murderers; they should not be free and at large, and it is difficult to pursue happiness in prison. i most certainly would not judge human value, if i were to do so, by societal or economic status. that would be shallow.

g

Status in society is not a sufficient measure of worthiness. Not that the opinion of the collective is meaningless, but it's just one perspective and often wrong.

Many people live quietly heroic lives that is not seen or appreciated by anyone, or just by immediate family at best. Those people contribute in their way and in their scope just as much as any Ghandi or Buddha or whoever that guy was that's depicted in the statue in the town square that the pigeons are always shitting on.

There are some people whose lives are only valuable in theory or potential but is totally unrealized practically speaking. I definitely know a handful of people who would have been better off never having children, or never having any appreciable authority, or even never having been born. It's sad to be able to confidently say, "the world would clearly be better off without this person", but there are definitely people of whom this can be said.

In the world of human robotic bodies of which you speak, different bodies are of unequal value depending on who is doing the rating. No one of them has much value though, and they are all short-lived like leaves on a tree.

IMO we are not our bodies. What we share in common—that which is of astronomic value, is conscious self-awareness. Not only are our true selves of EQUAL value. They are extensions of a unified whole. My opinion.