I'd have to answer most of the questions with a definite maybe.
1. If someone kills you and steals from your body, are they stealing from you or your beneficiaries? Sorry, irrelevant in the game. If someone attacks you and steals your money, and you later attack them and steal it back, steal whatever they bought with it, or steal other money from them, is it still stealing? In most, if not all, wars, both sides believe they are right. Country X needs room to expand and water for it's people and livestock, so it's a matter of survival to move on to lands belonging to country Y. Country Y needs to keep it's land and water, so it's a matter of survival to keep X from taking it. If they go to war, who is "evil" and who is "good"?
2. If you witness an attack, but would end up dead if you intervened, is it cowardice or survival to stay out of it?
3. If the weak person had stolen first, would it be good to defend the person just because he/she is weak? Unless you know the history behind the attack, you really can't be sure if it's good or not, can you?
4. They can be similar, or completely different. Revenge is retaliating in the same way that you were injured. If it was wrong for someone to attack you, wouldn't it be just as wrong for you to attack back for revenge? Under most governments, revenge is illegal but justice is legal (if done by the correct people).
5. I don't really see how there can be good guy or bad guy options since nobody but you know your reasons for doing things. I believe any options should be available to all, or the majority, of players. That means that if a duelist is attacked in revenge for attacking someone else, a group of duelists should be able to form a posse to go after the other person (if posses for "good guys" were implemented.) I don't really see it solving anything.
6. Yes, as long as it's clear that you have to choose one of the directions they've included.