Still, if we got together - in private - and one of us, aged 16, in depression, consents to the rest killing her, or injecting addictive drugs, that raises no moral issue. Ah, wrong again, I trust (my moral illiteracy showing) for the Jay dictum must surely accept explanatory expansion over quite what counts as consent.
Reasoned consent in no doubt, animals excluded, a couple privately wallow in extramarital carnal delights, safely under Jay's moral neutrality assurance. Oops again! Even if spouses remain unaware of partners' infidelity, are we sure no harm is done, no moral issues raised?
The moral is not that private consensual assisted death, adultery, abortion and so on are never morally justified, but that they raise moral issues. Beware moral simplicities - maybe even this one.
London EC1Reuse content