[narf poit chez BOOM]

Well, first of all, we have to figure out why animating a skeleton is evil. Using your explanation, an animated skeleton would be the tortured soul of some poor sap shoved into a dead body.

Now, assuming the necromancer knows this, what he has done is tortured someone to provide food.

Assuming this someone is an innocent, we may then assume that D&D heavens aren't that safe. Now, to reduce it to basic morality, there is Means and Motive.

The Means is the torture of an innocent to provide food for starving children.

The Motive is then most likely (Assuming the best possible motive) the desire to provide food for the living. Assuming the best possible motive, this person will then be racked with guilt over their actions until they resolve it. The best possible resolution is that they accept that it is wrong, but that they are committing a smaller wrong to right a greater wrong.

I cannot see any possible way this would not result in the eventual assumption of expedience as the ultimate morality. This is, in D&D terms, Neutral.

Therefore, the resulting morality on the D&D axis would be Neutral.

In my real world terms, expedience above all else is just another evil, as evil comes from lack of balance - In this case, in motivations. Note that I do not say that expedience in and of itself is bad - It isn't.