That's not what I intended. I did respond, I'm not sure what your missing. We don't agree. You suggest there is morality and right and wrong have a grey area. I disagree. Your examples do not differ or show a change in that concept, but intend to reinforce them. Because our views differ, it only furthers each of our own views in opposite directions. Your fireworks example isn't grey to me, its black and white. Can you buy those things legally there. Yes. Can you take them across state lines, depends. If you do, and its legal, you can't use them, because the state your in deemed it illegal. The part that's legal is always legal. The part that isn't will always no be. Mixing the two doesn't muddy the water, unless you want it to be muddy. I'm not looking for a way to justify that, because I'd stay on my side of the line, or go to the other side of the line, but for me there's no middle.
Even if you steal a loaf of bread because your hungry. Its wrong. It has consequences and impacts real people on both sides. The hungry person has food and can survive, but at what cost. To save pride so to not ask for help, or to find a solution that was more effort? That's not to say anyone should go hungry, only that those choices have consequences. Would I steal bread if I were starving. I don't know. I probably would, if I had asked and exhausted every imaginable way to survive without crossing that line. However I wouldn't think that made it right. I would still feel guilt and shame for that because its wrong.
I hope anyone, including you, get something from this discussion. We don't have to agree to take away something important and meaningful, even if its resolve.