What if a famous person goes into a disabled toilet to have sex, but they just go by themselves?
What if two able-bodied people go into a disabled toilet, have sex, but they borrow someone's wheelchair? And, for the purposes of sex in an airport disabled toilet, does luggage with wheels qualify as a wheelchair? (A lot of bags have four wheels, and you can sit on them - arguably, that meets the definition of a wheelchair. A wheel-stool? Indeed, some luggage is even called carry-on luggage - and we all remember the Carry On films. Ooh la la. If a bag is made for carry-on, clearly they mean rampant, ramp-accessible rumpy-pumpy.)
Stay with me on this. What if two able-bodied people go into a disabled toilet, have sex, but one of them is legally blind and the other one slightly hard of hearing?
And if blindness qualifies, what if two able-bodied people go into a disabled toilet, have sex, but switch off the lights?
These are the complex issues that occupy our neurons and news media right now.
When the news hit about the disabled toilet, my first thought was whether 10 minutes in a disabled toilet was more or less serious than 10 minutes of sex in a disabled parking space.
(And for men's rights activists, what about when women use cubicles in men's toilets - am I right guys?)
Then there's transgender. Let's agree that transgender people can self-decide which toilet to use. Based on that, what if someone able-bodied sees themselves as a disabled person in an able body? What if someone able-bodied sees themselves as transitioning to becoming disabled, for about 10 minutes, just after meeting a hottie at the airport?
Right and wrong used to be much simpler. Aesop could tell you a story: it would involve a chicken, a fox, maybe a few grapes, and the moral would be clear. Or Jesus could whip out a parable: it would involve his mates fishing, some sort of catering issues, happy ending. Simple, clear.
Jesus would have had far fewer disciples if they'd had to deal with Snapchat.
Imagine how fat the New Testament would have to be if issues of celebrity, accessibility, Snapchat and privacy came into it.
There'd be daily press conferences where Judas would have to say: "Look, it was just locker room talk."
Or: "I thought that picture was only gonna last 10 seconds."
Imagine if they'd hired a stripper for the Last Supper. Management would have to hold an inquiry, there'd be investigative paintings by Da Vinci, and still we wouldn't get to the bottom of things.
Jesus wouldn't even be able to do a Sermon on the Mount. There'd be questions about how the disabled are meant to get up there.
Of course, there is always Jesus' great line about casting the first stone.
Who among us hasn't had sex in a toilet?
Indeed, who among us hasn't gone to the toilet on a bed? (It's called bedwetting, folks.)
You don't need to be the Unitary Plan to realise some spaces can be multi-use.
The other issue is how do we reward the couple - the brave whistleblowers - who considered it their duty to patiently record audio of the activity inside the toilet. Has WikiLeaks hired them yet? At the very least, Christchurch Airport should make them Head Prefects of the entire airport toilet and food court area. And, as Head Prefects, they should be hired to record audio in toilets all the time, not just when people are in there having sex.
Let's be honest: people having sex in a toilet is by no means the worst crime you've ever heard against a toilet. I've heard toilet crimes that make Assad seem like a diplomat. I've heard toilet crimes that really should alert an ambulance.
We're all holding devices with more computing power than Apollo XI had to land people on the moon. And what we use it for is this. Dick pics. Toilet audio. Angry Birds.
No wonder the Samsung phones are self-destructing. They're disgusted at us.
