Based on what?
You, on the other hand, have by your own words demonstrated your lack of honor.
Today, I'll be going to court to file an opposition brief in a case in which a deadbeat, someone who believes as you do, is trying to get relief from their failure to answer a complaint. That person lacks honor. Even if I win, even if I get a judgment and collect, that person, as you do, lacks honor. See, the moral thing to do is to pay the debt, or make best efforts to pay the debt, not say "sue me" and then force the other side to collect. Having honor is why my client would never do business with this person again, and it's why my client, and I, can give our word to others and not be questioned about whether we will perform.
You, on the other hand, go into any deal with the knowledge that you will back out of it on a whim and say, "sue me". You will then use every dodge known to man during the suit, and try to weasel out of it. Then when you lose, you will hide assets and do what you can to keep the aggrieved party from collecting. If all those "honorable" actions fail, you will then declare bankruptcy if you can. If you can't go bankrupt, because you actually have the money, you will cause me to spend a lot more pursuing the debt than I should have had to.
And, because that conduct is not criminal, you claim it is not "immoral". It is simply you doing what the law allows you to do, breach a contract and then suffer the consequences that the law and the contract provide for. Breaching the contract in the first place, breaking that promise, is the immoral act. That you don't recognize this puts you in a category of person known as "sociopath".
The layperson term for people with your morality (actually, lack thereof) is "scum". I don't think it is insane to think that deadbeats are scum. I think it may be insane to engage a deadbeat in an argument about the morality of paying your obligations. They have no morality, and so it becomes like arguing with a pig. You can never get anywhere, and it just annoys the pig.
So, I am done engaging with you, madam.
I could write a book!
So, what you are saying is that you knew of the entire system of law, from hiding of assets to bankruptcy, yet, you took the risk to do business with the person in question. You failed to provide protections against the risks involved and want the legal system to protect you instead.
It seems you failed to honor yourself, and, as with the other sheeple, you want someone else to protect you from the risks you assumed.
In business there are few absolutes. Risk management is what business is all about, yet, having failed to manage your risks properly, you complain that the other person is without honor as though you didn’t know of these risks to begin with.
This isn’t about honor, it is about your betting the farm on risks that you failed to manage properly and are upset about it.