Shitty soup

I didn't. I responded to your hypothetical question in which you assumed that I had moral imperatives:

The question is still: How would you reject a moral imperative unless it were by another, perhaps more powerful, moral imperative?

I agree my wording was poor - I should have said that I don't accept that this hypothetical occurence has any moral imperative - i.e. that it is as neutral as your standing up/sitting down example. To follow your line, all you have to do is get in there first and say "this is unethical" - anyone who then disagrees can't just say it's ethically neutral, they have to say that it's positively ethical. Like an intellectual version of getting the first punch in.

Speaking of which, if you carry on with this nonsense, I'm going to hit you and argue about the ethics of that later :0