[HighStakesPro]

The answer to the 3nd question is no. There is a difference between practicing, or "doing" morality, and studying or talking about morality. You could call that "metamorality" or "metaethics". One does not need to study morality to be moral, nor does one need to be moral to study morality. Studying morality is not itself a moral act by conventional standards of morality, although since morality is subjective, you could argue that *anything* is either moral or immoral (I assume that you mean amoral and immoral to be the same thing.) So while the ridicule itself might be immoral, the dissuasion from studying morality is not.