Evil man or consistent reasoning?

Judge Garry Neilsen has recently suggested that sexual relations between consenting adults who are brother and sister might be found acceptable by a jury. Such is the logic of individual liberty (‘as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone’) that denies traditional moral norms unless they can be shown to cause harm. What seems peculiar is that there is such a furore about what the judge has said. Isn’t he being consistent with a culture that has normalised abortion, adultery, torture etc. in the name of individual liberty and the utilitarian principle of maximising pleasure? If you do away with God-given norms then what precisely is the problem with sex between brother and sister (who are adults)? This is yet another example of the moral confusion of a society that sometimes holds to its Judeo-Christian roots and sometimes rejects them; moral confusion runs rife.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.