Someone tell me again how to reconcile the profit motive with "love of money is the root of all evil. " I'm not saying either position is correct, I'm just saying there's an obvious conflict, so trying to maintain both is nigh impossible. And, I'll not as an aside, the people RUNNING the GOP figured this out almost from Day One, so you can pretty much assume that when one of them gets up there talking about "Christian family values" they're selling something; selling crap for more than it's worth is the whole basis of the profit motive. If you're only getting out what you put in, there's no profit, and if you're getting out MORE than you put in then you're getting more than your share, which is profitable, but not exactly ethical.

So if you can still make the payments without difficulty, no, I can't see how it's moral to walk away from an obligation you voluntarily entered. On the other hand, there are penalties and contingencies associated with that, and if those consequences are acceptable to you, perhaps it is moral. A bigger question is whether it was moral to offer people mortgages KNOWING they would default (even though THEY didn't know) and what obligations the borrower is under in those circumstances. If someone knowingly gave me a loan they knew I couldn't repay, even if I thought I could, there's a school of thought that says you can't con an honest man and me walking away is something they expected anyway (hence the credit default swaps. )