Swingers in court

SCOTUS? How about SCOC?

We may have an election campaign going on up here in Canada, but our Supreme Court will soon be busy hearing a landmark case on... no, not abortion, not police powers, not church and state, but... swinging.

Which is to say, swingers will soon have their day in court, the highest court in the land: "The Supreme Court of Canada is set to rule on whether spouse-swapping in public venues should be a criminal act. The ground-breaking case, which could set new standards for decency in Canadian society, stems from two Montreal 'swingers' clubs charged with keeping a bawdy house."

I suppose I'm with the swingers on this one. I am quite the civil libertarian, after all, and I'm just not sure how swingers' clubs present any sort of danger either to individual participants or to the public beyond.

And it's not like swingers are getting together to build bombs or drink poisoned Kool-Aid. On one level, they're just getting together for group sex and the thrill thereof; on a deeper level, many of them are likely just getting together to sate the urges of some sputtering midlife crisis or to live out some lingering sexual fantasy bubbling up from the recesses of their subconscious.

If the public has an interest in such clubs, any interest, it's mostly just a prurient one (curiosity + titillation + desire to give it a try). Critics on the right may object to the utter immorality of it all, but so what? They ought to keep their morality to themselves and, in so keeping, reconsider much of it. The sexuality of humanity is only natural, after all, and there's really nothing wrong with the expression of that sexuality in the close confines of some private swingers' club.