kazaa and Judge Moore

Gotta love the piece, today, from Marci Hamilton in FindLaw comparing Judge Moore, music downloaders, and the Catholic Church. How? The shared sense of entitlement.
I'll leave the article for you to read (quickly, she argues that downloaders, the Catholic Church, and Moore feel a sense of entitlement in their activity that lifts them above clear legal restrictions)- but here's the postscript, wherein she asserts that, maybe, the age of entitlement may be ending:

Fortunately, the Entitlement Era may be coming to a close. With more and more institutions inclined to call lawbreaking just what it is - from the RIAA's willingness to call stealing stealing, to the Boston Globe's willingness to call abuse abuse - entitlement is under siege. Lawbreaking is lawbreaking no matter who the perpetrator is - whether a church, or a state Supreme Court justice, or a college student - and increasingly, some have come to insist on that very truth.

But is that really true? Kind of absolutist- which may be right. I think she's right to say lawbreaking is lawbreaking- but should that lawbreaking carry the same meaning for each instance? Going 5 over on the interstate is lawbreaking and murdering a stranger is lawbreaking; but, these two instances of lawbreaking mean very different things- both in consequence and (as importantly) in their social acceptance/disgust.
It seems entitlement might also be another word for the way we feel when driving 5 over- and if we were punished "too severely," we would feel entitled to social sympathy. But I digress. Read the article.