The person you're replying to is not accusing you of stealing, they are using stealing from a candy store as a metaphor for how a certain amount of behavior that a company doesn't like is tolerated because it is not worth the effort to stop. The point is that Google could prevent most people from using ad blockers any time they wanted, but don't view it as worth the bad PR (or choose not to for other reasons).
This is a rhetorical bait-and-switch. The "stealing candy from a store" messaging is crafted to imply moral failure. The implication is there when you present the situation with that framing—you can't just walk it back when called out on it!
Nobody frames, say, taking a bathroom break when the ads play during a football game this way.
Well, someone else is covering it in post it notes and serving it to you. Again, the same issue applies, if everyone covers the ads in the journal then the advertisers will leave the journal and it will have to shutdown.
