The problem with this discussion is that D&D alignments do not follow the same rules that the real world does. In dungeons and dragons, morality is absolute, existing as something external to the humans who name such concepts. While there are numerous real-world religions and philosophies that believe Good and Evil to be absolutes, I suspect that most of the people contributing to these discussions do not on balance believe that good and evil are so rigidly defined, the modern world having embraced a certain amount of moral relativism. Furthermore, those philosophies tend to place all humans on one end of the spectrum (as in the concept of original sin, for example).
Since you can't, in the real world, Detect someone's Alignment, or have your sword catch fire when you Smite evildoers, there's a lot less certainty to go around. Without a clear and present external judge, we can't say that alignment is so obvious as it is in dungeons and dragons, which is why there is such difficulty deciding if something like a white lie qualifies as evil. In Dungeons and Dragons, an act is Evil if it is performed by an Evil creature, and Good if performed by a Good creature, no more and no less. Yes, it is possible to change alignments, but the rules assume that that only happens to PCs or plot-central NPCs, who get all sorts of exceptions when it comes to moral codes.
Thus, I think that if you are trying to bring a D&D alignment system into the real world, you have to look at intent, rather than action, because the alignment system attempts to measure an inherent quality to the person it describes. Some people tell lies because they wish to make others happy ("Yours was the best play in the whole festival!"), while others tell lies for some kind of personal advantage ("Yes, I was most terribly deathly ill on the day of the test. Cough."), and still others simply for the joy of storytelling ("Did I ever tell you about the fish I caught last weekend? It was THIS BIG!"). The first is pretty clearly a good action, the second either chaotic or evil, depending on whether someone is hurt by the lie or not, and the last pretty squarely chaotic. It is even possible to tell lies with lawful intent, if you are forced into a deception because of some overarching moral principle.
If you want to meaningfully judge a person's alignment - something which is pretty presumptuous of us to attempt - you have to look at the balance of intent behind their actions. We don't have character sheets or manifest deities telling us whether what we do is good or bad, so only in the sum of our thoughts and desires can something as fundamental as an alignment be said to be found.
That said, I'm Lawful Neutral.