I believe that Yeah. In the link you provided, all of the attempt is to put fuzzy logic (a continuum) on the right and wrong (good and bad). Not all good things are good the same level and not all bad things are bad the same level.
As much as I know about moral frameworks (ethical, or deontlogical systems) like Utilitarianism, Epicurean Philosophy, Satisfaction-based moralities, Islam, Christianity, etc. all put different values for different good and bad acts.
But first let see what utilitarianism is all about? From Microsoft Encarta Dictionary we have:
the ethical doctrine that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the criterion of the virtue of action.
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Thus utilitarianism is really a fuzzy ethical system. If what you do makes people happy by 20 points, while what I do make'em happy by 50 points, then my action is better than yours. It's that simple.
Now, as I said, this holds true in almost all ethical systems without being regenerated or re-constructed.
Hope that I was clear enough :)