Nevertheless, you stooped to a stupid attempt at analogy by asserting that animals only act in their own self-interest, and suggested that as a basis for such a principle among humans.
Please don't lie about what I've said you stupid Jew.
As i've pointed out before, i'm not a Jew. Whether or not i were, the only real evidence that i were stupid in this context would be if i agreed with what passes for philosophy and "objectivism" at your house.
Our boy David here sounds so much like the semi-literate right-wing gun nuts at this site when he prates about "collectivism." He constructs a single elaborate example from nature, which he stupidly supposes describes the attitudes of all animals toward self-preservation. In so doing, of course, he must ignore all the examples from nature of animals who work cooperatively to accomplish their collective survival. It is necessary for him to ignore all the examples of animals who band together to discourage or drive off predators, all the examples of animals who will risk their own lives to distract a predator from their off-spring. Apparently, he thinks that one or two examples of his tortured "logic" about animal behavior are sufficient to authorize his phony assertions about moral rugged individualism, which he is pleased to call and sufficiently self-deluded to call objective.
So one wonders--does David grow and hunt all the food which he eats? Does he clothe his nakedness in the skins of the animals he has killed? Did he go about looking for stones to smash together until he found those which were sufficiently fissile to shear off, leaving a useful edge? Did he hew down the trees to make his home, and to make the shafts of his spears, and the hafts of his axes? Surely he must, since he so despises "collectivism."
Would not someone who heaps such scorn on collectivism eschew the benefits of electric power generation? Would not such a noble example of self-realized man refuse to stoop to buying electronic instruments manufactured in a factory, staffed by slaves to collectivism? How could such a noble character deign to employ the world-wide web to come here an pour obloquy on our devoted pates?
JJ is, obviously, nothing more than David's bulldog, come here to fling vile epithets at anyone who has the temerity to dissent from the gospel according to David. As she so clearly relies on "David says" for her moral guidance, is she not precisely the same kind of vile, baby-killing, Zionist Jew criminal she so roundly execrates?
Does JJ labor in the fields beside her inamorata to get her daily bread in the sweat of her brow? I think not.
So what could account for this puzzling failure of JenHen to live up to the rigorous standards by which they judge all of us? What will account for this cowardly and criminal submission on the part of JenHen to the collectivist mentality?
Oh, wait . . . i know . . . they're both great barking hypocrites.
Amen to that Setanta.
Poor tortured Davy-boy lol.