Well, you've had a lifetime of experience with this concept and I've had mere months as a non-practising scholar (although I do admit to having read quite a few of the relevant texts).

When that which is perceived as the natural order of the (physical and moral) universe is distinguished from the unnatural and immoral, I raise the question on how these claims are validated. My limited experience and knowledge on this topic suggests that the the true and the good are being presented as the same.

I am not suggesting that free will and agency are denied - that would make karma a very difficult concept - rather that I don't think that statements that appeal to truth and rightness raise the same validity claims and nor do they have the same means of verification; truth is achieved (in my view) through external correspondence, rightness by intersubjective consensus.