For me being moral consists in taking the actions necessary to sustain and further my life actions -- such as thinking rationally and planning for the future, being honest and having integrity, producing goods or services and trading them with others,judging people rationally (according to the relevant facts) and treating them accordingly, and so on. In a word, we hold that being moral consists in being rationally selfish or egoistic.
Egoism is the morality of non-sacrifice; it rejects every form of human sacrifice—both self-sacrifice and the sacrifice of others—as a matter of principle. It holds that being moral consists in rationally pursuing one’s life-promoting values, neither sacrificing one to others nor sacrificing others to one.
Egoism upholds the principle of non-sacrifice— the idea that one should never surrender a greater value for the sake of a lesser value. This principle is the recognition of the fact that giving up the requirements of one’s life and happiness is inimical to one’s life and happiness. Of course, life requires that we regularly forgo lesser values for the sake of greater ones; however, these are gains, not sacrifices. A sacrifice is the giving up of something that is more important to one’s life and happiness for the sake of something that is less important to one’s life and happiness; thus, it results in a net loss (mostly seen in love case or any normal relationship. and we rate sacrifice highly in our life).
To live, people must pursue values, not give them up (what my friend did actually). According to egoism, if a person pursues his life-serving values and refuses to sacrifice them, he is acting morally and if he does not, he is not acting morally. If he produces values and trades them with others for a profit (whether material or spiritual), he is thereby being moral, he is gaining values on which his life and happiness depend.
On this view, if as software developer i trades my product with others for a profit i am being moral. A volunteer social worker who gives away his time and effort for nothing at all is thereby being immoral. Similarly, a soldier who fights for freedom on the grounds that life without liberty is not worth living (“Give me liberty, or give me death!”) is being moral; one who fights in obedience to an alleged “supernatural” being’s commands is not.
We can see somewhat black-and-white difference between trading values for gains and giving up values for nothing. Egoism is for the first; altruism for the second.
In a way standards of value according to altruism is self-sacrifice which our society rates highly. The standard of value according to a predator is his whim. The standard of value according to hedonism is pleasure or feelings. The standard of value according to rational egoism is the requirements of man’s life.
Thus i must say that individual should live his own life for his own sake. He should live his own life-promoting goals, such as a wonderful career, a passionate romantic relationship,enjoyable recreational activities, great friendships,a rational culture, and a social system that protects his right to do so (i am not sure about my friend goal when he refused his Girlfriend).
I don't agree that our life require any sacrifice. We as a people can live without giving up our minds, our values, our lives, people can live without murdering, assaulting, or defrauding one another. Nor can human sacrifice promote human life or happiness. It can lead only to suffering. If we want to live and be happy, we must neither sacrifice themselves nor sacrifice others; rather, we must pursue life-serving values and respect the rights of others to do the same.