The debate over what should be allowed in private (and in public) always intrigues me, and while Clayton Cramer does not always reach the same conclusions that I do, he has a keen ability to raise challenging and logical questions, and spot issues like this:

The entire liberal movement is based on the idea that what consenting adults do in private (at least if it involves sex) is fine.

And hell, even if it isn't that, it's a reminder of why I'm not a liberal, because I don't think whatever consenting adults do is "fine." I share the "ick" reaction to a number of things, and I find the idea of things like being tied up and whipped in private or eating human excrement to be revolting, which is far from "fine."

I also think cheating on spouses (whether formal "adultery" or not) is a profound betrayal of trust, and much worse than sado-masochism or coprophagy, and I'd put it in a moral category approaching theft. It betrays love, and does moral harm to all involved. But unlike theft, adultery is not a crime against society, because of the presence of consent. Consenting to "theft" nullifies the theft. If a store owner tells a would-be thief it's OK to take something and he does, the thief is not chargeable. However, the store owner might be cheating himself and harming his family by allowing the "theft," and I think that adultery would fall into that sort of category. The people concerned are those involved; not society.

The communitarian view, of course, is that all of us are affected by all things that we do. Depending on the type of communitarian, this might include adultery as well as icky sex.

Not being a communitarian means I'm not a liberal, and not a conventional social conservative. To the latter group, one must do more than refrain from (or disapprove of) things like promiscuity. One must believe that all morally disapproved things (whether done in private or not) damage an entity called "society," and must work against them. Sorry, but that's where (as I have explained previously) I part company with the social conservatives -- although I try to do so as respectfully as possible. I just can't see what people do in their bedrooms as concerning me in any way -- even in theory. Unless they are trying to drag me into it, it just doesn't concern me. If my next door neighbor does things in private with his wife (or with someone else), I don't want to know about it. It is not my business. That does not make it "fine." I don't even want to know what it is, and while it may be "fine," it may be gross and disgusting. Why would I want to know?

Of course, if he's doing it in the front yard and it upset my dog Coco, that would be another matter.

Another post by Cramer reminded me that liberals probably think Bible reading between consenting adults is worse than sex between consenting adults. But not Koran reading!

Ick!

What are the implications for those who desecrate?

(I hate double standards.)

MORE: Speaking of consenting in private, you can test your sexual orientation here. It seems like a pretty accurate test, although I don't see any particular need to disclose whether I took the test, much less the results if any.