Hmmmm, some interesting points...

But don't you mean by culture the word civilization? The definition of culture is as follows: "The arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively." I would submit that religion is most certainly a part of culture also, but since that's a "taboo" word anymore, the dictionary left it out.

Granted, civilization and culture are two sides of the same coin, but civil societies agree on laws and that's more closely associated with a civilization than with a culture. I think that to put this in better terms, it would be like saying that culture is the road, civilization is the horse and laws are the cart.

Culture may inform someone that a certain act is bad, but it lacks any power to enforce or even make a law to punish said behavior. Civilizations therefore spring from cultures of like minded individuals. And in order for a society to be civil, it must have laws and be able to enforce them. This then would be the distinction between culture and civilizations.

Does that make sense?

In other words cultural norms may inform a person on what's wrong or right, but that does not make a law. A civilization must form from that culture and then that civilization must agree upon laws. Only a civilization has the power then to make and more importantly, to enforce laws.