It seems perfectly valid to "moralize" (that word sure has some baggage, doesn't it?) about those who have power exercising it at the expense of those who don't. In fact, I'd expressly encourage it.
Not saying I'm particularly worried in this case, but overall I don't think that "argument" is a very convincing one if we're actually concerned with "doing the right thing".
I hear you, but whether or not something is difficult is orthogonal to whether or not it's morally right. You don't get off the hook because doing the right thing is hard.
If the "right" thing was also the prudent thing, we wouldn't have to make the distinction. Religion and law try to balance out the cost of morality, but in the end, a lot of the world wins by bad behavior, so we will often pay for being good. But we still should.
reply