Pragmatically there would be no difference in meaning.
I'm not going to try to pick apart the sematics of "and" and "or", but simply note that the choice to "give one's life" is not done in a rational or calculating manner. A person who would die for either would die for both. A person who'd die for both would die for either.
In this I'm really only considering the meaning of "give his life" and the pragmatic effect that has on the interpretation of the whole sentence.
However even with a less dramatic sentence
He would buy candy for Tom and Pete [Tom or Pete].
Would be understood to mean either both together or separately.