> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of kcwalker at syr.edu
> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 6:56 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: RE: "Heterosexual Marriage"!
>
>
>
> >
> >(this is probably the WRONG list to advocate "rich get richer, poor get
> >poorer" is a good thing) <SNIX>
>
>
> mainly becasue you are advocating an incredibly uhm ridiculously wrong
> grasp of the concept of darwinism--social darwinism.
>
> bzzzzzzzzzt!
>
No, what I am implying is that if I posted this message to a mailing list of capitalists and advocated "Fuck the poor" the response would be "Right on!" Besides it was a joke (hence the "<SNIX>" next to the comment).
And why is it wrong? Just because we can grasp the concept of "sharing" why is it wrong if we don't? I have two units of water, another person has no water. They die. Because they are human makes it more "wrong" than if they were an animal, a plant, or a bacterium? At least if I keep the animal or plant alive I could kill it later for food or the plant gives of oxygen for me, and hence the circle of life continues.
There may be a benefit (if we were stranded on a desert isle) having another human for company and assistance that would make my chance of survival greater. However this isn't the case. The only benefit I get out of keeping another human alive is the alieviation of some form of 'guilt' in my mind brought on by the indoctrinated into me during my formative years by a liberal school system and religious institutions.