In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
You’re all familiar with this one. It’s a defense for something traditionally considered immoral that usually begins with a variant of “if two consenting adults want to …”
We could call it a “no harm” argument. It’s the idea that if nobody’s demonstrably hurt, nothing wrong happened. But even the New York Times recently poked holes in it.
Tom: Immanuel Can, is it possible to have a sin without a resulting injury?
Immanuel Can: The short answer? No, I don’t think it is.