What I am referring to is unilateral action.

If I have been wronged by someone, I cannot unilaterally decide what is adequate compensation if it involves breaking the law.

There ARE mitigating circumstances - I never said that things are absolute. I just said right and wrong are not as hard as people think.

Killing is wrong. Killing someone while defending myself from someone attempting to kill me, is not.

Stealing a loaf of bread can be justified by the needs of your starving family.

I believe that stealing a plane ticket cannot be justified by being mistreated by an employer.

If the mistreatment is serious enough, you have a legal avenue to remedy what you consider unjust. This is a thriving business in fact.

If an employer only partially mistreats an employee, are they entitled to only steal smaller items? Would this be moral?

Can you steal a fax machine for being yelled at? Can you steal a chair if your boss belittles you at a meeting?

I believe right and wrong ARE easier than people think. People know that stealing is wrong, so to justify the action they must muddy the waters. To hear some people (not you, nor anyone on this forum), NOTHING is wrong anymore.

Morality is not concrete, but it isn't sand either.

On this issue, I believe we are standing on a parking lot, not on a beach.

------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."