All your examples- which are good ones- are examples of people pulling a lever as opposed to not doing anything to disrupt a "natural" pre-existing system.

I'm reminded of the adage "don't tear down a fence until you find out exactly why it was there in the first place."

I agree that intent may play a role in how we decide to morally evaluate behavior, but I argue that it is CHOOSING TO ACT to interfere or change a state makes you truly culpable when the consequences results in harm- no matter what your intentions were.