Agenda? what agenda?

Massachusetts' highest court once again rules that old obstacles to free sexual expression must be swept aside.

BOSTON (AP) The state's highest court ruled Monday that the state's law against incest doesn't apply to stepparents and said it was up to the Legislature to enact a ban.

Ruling in the case of a 60-year-old man accused of having sex with his teenage stepdaughter, the Supreme Judicial Court said under the current law the incest prohibition applies only to natural or adoptive parents.

A law professor observes that the court wasn't willing to construe the word "parent" broadly here, although in another case, it's certainly been willing to construe "marriage" broadly:

Wendy Murphy, a professor at the New England School of Law, said she appreciated the court's ruling ''in a technical sense,'' but she questioned why the justices didn't recognize the role of stepparents in modern families when they have recognized the changing nature of families in other cases.

For instance, the SJC noted the ''changing realities of the American family'' in its landmark decision in November that found it was unconstitutional to ban gay marriage in the state.

Aren't we lucky to have such wise judges?