I don't think they're "dealing in absolutes" nearly as much as you might be perceiving that they do.

It's further ironic for you to mention this in a thread that was kicked off with this:

> The price of freedom is disobedience.

(a statement heavily dealing in absolutes)

Not the case. Freedom is orthogonal to legality. To exercise freedom is to fundamentally admit the possibility of disobedience within any sort of rules based framework.

What is not the case?

You can disagree with him, but it's a good idea to have read Kant when forming an opinion on those types of things.