To be clear, I do not have a strong opinion about the "code is the law" rule. Maybe it's not such a good idea and maybe the "kill switch" that you mention is worth considering.

What I do have a strong opinion about is this: when you publicly announce that "code is the law" (which is effectively what the phrase "unstoppable contracts" means and what was reiterated in the DAO terms & conditions) than you need to stick to this rule, no matter what, even if it means a huge financial loss and going against the will of the majority of your community or even destruction of the entire platform. In other words, take full responsibility for your words, as this is one of the fundamental (and absolute) meta-rules, on which our civilization stands.

You seem to acknowledge my point but still you dismiss it as just naive (or I would say, manipulative) marketing which should not be treated seriously. For me, it's much more than that and maybe this is actually the core of our disagreement.

As for your other arguments, it's obvious that we need to distinguish between forks which fix mistakes (so that existing rules are imposed) and forks which change the rules retroactively. There is a huge difference between those two.

And finally:

I do not think there is any absolute truth or at least I don't know of any. Science doesn't work on absolute values.

I think you actually believe there are absolute truths, as otherwise your life would be unbearable. They are deep inside you, accumulated by millions of years of evolution, just inaccessible on the rational layer. Or so intrinsic that you don't even notice them.

As for science, I fully agree, it doesn't work on absolute values. That's why it's extremely efficient in building stuff and completely useless in telling you how to live. And I guess the latter is much more important than the former.