False Prophets

A Prescient Judge Points the Way

A judge in Downunder has caused discombobulation and outrage at his suggestion that there is nothing principially wrong with incest.  That incest should be advocated from the bench ought not be surprising to Christians.  When secular humanism becomes the regnant religion, anything that can be done will be done--and will likely be endorsed and approved.  The reason is that the ethic of secular humanism runs, "I am the master of my fate; man is the measure of all things; nothing human is foreign or absolutely wrong." 

When this ethic is applied consistently to sexual mores nothing is implicitly forbidden.  Explicit prohibitions are ignorant, primitive, time-bound prejudices and subject to change by the next more-enlightened generation.  We are in the middle of just such a sea change.

The secularists are actively pushing the boundaries.  But The Daily Telegraph in the land of Oz has been so outraged, it has called for a judge to be sacked. Why?  Because the judge has suggested that there is nothing wrong with incest, only sexual and physical mechanics which can easily be controlled.

BEYOND their role as legal arbiters, judges are supposed to offer a form of moral framework around the laws they work with. Their remarks from the bench are a broader guide to society’s proper functioning.  That is the intention. District Court Judge Garry Neilson’s comments on incest, however, run contrary to any civilised moral code.

Here is what Neilson had to say, during an April trial that has only recently been reported: “A jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now available.”

Neilson said the “only reason” incest is still a crime is because of the risk of genetic abnormalities: “But even that falls away to an extent (because) there is such ease of contraception and ready access to abortion.” In almost any context, these comments are utterly indefensible. Neilson’s remarks were made during the case of a man ­alleged to have repeatedly raped his younger sister in the 1980s.

To say that Neilson has stepped outside the accepted boundaries of a judge’s role would be to severely understate matters. There is no possibility of explaining away or rationalising these comments. He should be stood down immediately.

The paper charges Neilson with breaching "civilised moral codes".  What, we inquire is a "civilised" moral code?  Does it prohibit abortion?  No, of course not.  That's perfectly acceptable.  Does it proscribe no-fault divorce?  Not at all.  A civilised moral code protects the "right" to abort, and permits and facilitates divorce on grounds as frivolous as both parties mutually deciding to split apart. Why should incest be so sacrosanct, since both abortion and divorce trade upon human volition and doctrines of made-up-human rights. If humans want anything, in principle it's OK, because "nothing human is foreign or alien to us".

Rather than breaching any civilised moral code, abortion on-demand and divorce on-demand are regarded as the hallmarks of civilisation today.  Why then the umbrage taken over incest?  The reality is that within the secularist world-view "civilised moral codes" are perfectly circular entities.  Whatever the law code endorses is "civilised" by its presence in the code.

But if the paper is appealing to some overarching moral code that holds all humanity to account and before which we will all be judged when the editors condemn such perversions, pray tell us what it is.  Where can this code be found and what are its precepts?  Secular humanists and evolutionists--the high priestly cast of our society--have none, at least none that are arguable or defensible.

Rather, the prevailing culture of secularist Unbelief rightly should lionise Neilson and promote him, if secularism is to be consistent and taken seriously.  And in the end it will.  Judge Neilson is true believer, an apostle of the established religion of the day, an enlightened and principled man.

In truth, however, those who sow to the secularist wind, will inherit the divine whirlwind, and thus progressively destructive tornadoes are sweeping across our culture and civilisation.  God is giving up our particularly perverse "civilisation".   He will not be mocked--thankfully.