This is a good point. Flourishing does not imply moral behavior. I think the "flourish" comment is an embellishment to my main argument, which does center around the morality of holding somebody accountable for a view they expressed six years in the past.

Taking it a step further, I do feel that, given enough space, I could defend the idea that a society's moral imperatives are quite tied to how it gets its corn-pone [1]. This is several levels beyond the scope of my comment, though.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html

A view they expressed six years ago, have not rescinded or clarified, and, oddly enough, is largely supported by their political donations going back 20 years [1].

[1] http://tim.dreamwidth.org/1845008.html