No worries, I just didn't want to be misunderstood.
Which is why I have stated multiple times in my posts that not only do I place zero blame on Lori for getting upset, I also believe that Carl didn't make a smart decision going alone. My main point came down to the ways the ZA would change parent/child relationships(my first post on the subject was about the Carl/Lori heated exchange) and the level of respect and responsibility given to children at younger ages would have to change drastically as well. A child like Carl, who has proven himself to be an asset to the team, would almost have to be regarded as more of an equal than a child---if he was to continue to prosper as a successful member of the group. I never said Carl should have been rewarded for what he did, but he shouldn't have been publically reprimanded for it either.
And while I agree that helping Hershel/impressing Beth would have been a motive to find the medical supplies, I also can't write off the possibility that Carl also has his mom's safety in the back of his mind...whether he admits it or not.
But I feel like the general idea of right and wrong is subjective, given the circumstances they are forced to live in. Look at how much laws and customs have changed over time, and how they differ from place to place or culture to culture. And now there are no established laws, rules, or regulations at all. What is right to some would be wrong to others, but the one uniform philosophy everyone could agree on would be survival. I also don't believe that there aren't universally wrong or bad decisions(because there are), just that the world in which they live in is almost entirely the gray area now. All kinds of despicable and morally wrong things can be reasoned and overlooked, just depends on how it affects you or yours. I don't think most people even realize what they could condone if it was done to keep them or the people they love safe. Look at earlier conversations about what Shane did to Otis, and I think you'll find that both sides have supporters. We aren't going to agree on this because we both see it differently. Therefore, we are neither right nor wrong.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and I think we may be having two different conversations.
I am using this as an example of the difference between moral right (relative) and logical / scientific / otherwise tangible right (absolute). In this situation the exchange between Lori, Carl, and Beth is relative. It is harder to establish right and wrong in this type of situation and often it is one of many shades of gray. But there is also the exploring alone, which is more like walking on thin ice. You might make it across but that doesn't make it any less stupid, ergo wrong. This is a logical thing, and something the adults in the group recognize.
1+1 will always equal two. You will get frostbite if you run around in subzero temperatures without protection, so the right thing to do is put on a jacket. And wandering alone, regardless of age, in a zombie infested prison is dangerous, so if you are not going to have a buddy at least let them know where you are. It is the right thing to do.
And again, it was less directed at you than it was me using the most recent instance of such an argument to make a point I had been thinking about.