I'm sorry you are completely missing the point.
From the first formulation of the categorical imperative, it is clear that morality requires the subordination of the individual's inclinations to a principle or law that is UNIVERSAL.
It does not state specific actions, only a specific formula. We may not take the life of others but we may offer our lives for others' sake. It is not so much as an arbitrary calculation of what a human life is worth, rather an individual's will, despite its selfish inclinations, choosing to act according to a universal law.
So, however opposed the action of, say, a samurai (inflicting themselves with death on a matter of honor and service) with that of a christian (forbidding suicide) it may seem, it is clear that they are very similar in that human dignity in all actions is a universal law.
In abraham's case, the offering of his son as a sacrifice is no more odd than a parent allowing his child to go to a just war. And if one can concieve of sacrifice in the vague notion of, say, democracy, what more in the express command of god? And in the latter case, the survival of one's child was assured.
