I agree with you that when people are asked what they mean by “Murder is immoral,” they tend to reply with some variant of one of the definitions on your list. But I don’t think most of those definitions actually capture what people mean by the word “moral” at all.

For example, your #6, what I might dub the most utilitarian definition of “moral”:
“…usually reduces the total net happiness of society.

I don’t think this works as a definition because when you exchange the word “moral” with phrase #6 in certain sentences, they go from sensible to nonsense. For example:

(A) “He reduced the total net happiness of society, but there’s nothing wrong with that.”
(B) “He acted immorally, but there’s nothing wrong with that.”

Most people would agree that (A) is a meaningful sentence, even if they disagree with it. But I think most people would also agree that (B) is not a meaningful sentence. To say “there’s nothing wrong with acting immorally” feels like a contradiction to us. Which I think proves that phrase #6 doesn’t actually capture the meaning of the word “moral” as people use it — and I think any wholly descriptive attempt to define morality will fail for the same reason. The word “moral” describes how people SHOULD act (so it’s normative), which is a separate thing from describing what the result will be if people DO act a certain way (which would be descriptive, like your #6).

1. Murder is wrong because God forbids it?

&

2. God Forbids murder because it is wrong?

I look forward to your reply.