Comments on: Does religion have a place in the marriage debate? https://www.policyforum.net/religion-place-marriage-debate/ The APPS Policy Forum a public policy website devoted to Asia and the Pacific. Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:32:19 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.7 By: Trevor Bell https://www.policyforum.net/religion-place-marriage-debate/#comment-10159 Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:32:19 +0000 https://www.policyforum.net/?p=20781#comment-10159 You are misleading people by suggesting that the benefit of Donoghue V Stevenson derived in part from a religious argument. The reference to loving your neighbour was a mere literary reference to set up a class of persons which needed to be better defined. Here is the relevant passage and people can make up their own minds.

“The liability for negligence, whether you style it such or treat it as in other systems as a species of “culpa,” is no doubt based upon a general public sentiment of moral wrongdoing for which the offender must pay. But acts or omissions which any moral code would censure cannot in a practical world be treated so as to give a right to every person injured by them to demand relief. In this way rules of law arise which limit the range of complainants and the extent of their remedy. The rule that you are to love your neighbour becomes in law, you must not injure your neighbour; and the lawyer’s question, Who is my neighbour? receives a restricted reply. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be – persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.”

]]>