morality

I’m not sure I understood the question. Are you suggesting 1. that morality was abolished following the giving of the Torah. Or are you claiming 2. that morality has always been rejected by the law? I made both claims and I don’t know which of the two your words are directed at. I will answer both. 1. There is a belief that requires one to be moral. And it is still true today. Now comes a religious-halakhic command that contradicts it. We have two options: A. It comes to abolish the moral principle. B. It comes to add another dimension to it that does not cancel it out. The principle of lex specialis that you mentioned at the end leads to my interpretation and not yours: the moral principle is in its own right, and the halakhic principle is added to it and does not cancel it out. So much for the first question. 2. As for the second question, I have often explained that it depends on whether the conflict is inherent or accidental. If it is inherent – indeed, morality will reject the halakha (except in very exceptional cases). If it is accidental, there is no relevance to the lex specialis, and there the matter is open to our decision.