To tolerate, approve or actively advocate a policy on the basis that it is amoral (or supposedly has no moral significance) is to advocate immorality.
'A-moral' is therefore a dishonest or delusional characterisation of im-moral.
This is a sub-category of the fact that there is no such thing as neutrality - except that to advocate neutrality is, indeed, to take the side of evil.
Everything, without exception, has a moral dimension - or, more accurately, everything is more or less Good, more or less evil (Good is moral, beautiful and true in unity - evil is the destruction of these).
And this is a sub-category of life being recognised as a field of unseen or spiritual 'warfare' - with every choice we move closer either to Heaven, or to Hell.
Indeed, the characterisation of something as amoral is a particularly insidious form of wickedness - because it helps create a mode of analysis which purports to elude the intrinsic Good-evil axis.
It tries to suggest that some things are 'not significant' (not worth worrying about) which is a step towards saying that nothing is significant - nihilism, in other words.
Amoral is part of the bureaucratic mindset.