So... it still sounds like primate politics are a better descriptor of what's actually happening. Primate politics is applicable in all cases, and doesn't require an explanation of why it gets put aside.
As soon as you start coming up with explanations for exceptions to morality, it's not an accurate theory or description of the real world. Having to layer on exception after exception takes it from parsimony to apologetics. It's the philosophical equivalent to retrograde motion. Only by using heliocentricism does one explain such motion better than possible with geocentrism.
There was better evidence for heliocentrism than geocentrism, even though geocentrism appealed greatly to humans' beliefs about the world and themselves. Similarly, there is better evidence for primate politics than morality, even though morality appeals greatly to humans' beliefs about the world and themselves.
If you don't care enough to research your own question, why should anyone else care more?
"Pay no attention to his long winded posts... (Explorer) seldomly knows what he's talking about."
"Actual knowledge and a google bookmark are very different things." Anonymous neg-repper