Divided over ‘right to equal marriage’

Allow me to explain the Biblical, Christian view. Marriage unites a man and a woman in a permanent committed loving sexual relationship, combining their complementary masculine and feminine qualities in a mother and father team capable of procreation and best suited to bringing up children. This secure structure should provide a foundation for a stable society of loving families, protecting adults, children and wider society from the ill-effects of the breakdown of sexual relationships.

Many marriages do fail but that is not the fault of the institution itself. Statistically, marriages are far more stable than other cohabiting sexual relationships. Equally, some may stay in a marriage for longer than they ought when being mistreated, but more jump ship prematurely, having failed to jointly investigate every possible avenue for reconciliation and restoration. Is Mr Petrie seriously suggesting that the more pressing issue in our society is that marriages are too stable?

Homosexual relationships tend to be more unstable and promiscuous than equivalent heterosexual ones, and homosexual sex correlates with a wide range of negative personal outcomes, in terms of physical health, mental health, drug addiction, alcoholism and suicide. Our society should not seek to endorse such relationships as equivalent to marriage.

As debate over same-sex “marriage” continues, I still await a positive answer to my perpetual question.

The egalitarian argument employed to justify same-sex “marriage” can equally be marshalled to justify polygamous, polyamorous, platonic or temporary marriage. What arguments can be made against them once it has been conceded that the definition of marriage is flexible?

The only answer yet offered by a correspondent to The Scotsman is that there are no arguments against these further dilutions of the meaning of marriage.

So, the only two positions being defended so far are keeping the current definition of marriage, or heading into the quagmire of marriage being repeatedly redifined and expanded to encompass any and every form of relationship as desired.

Richard Lucas

Colinton

Edinburgh

ACCORDING to a survey by The Equality Network, a clear majority of our MSPs are in favour of equal marriage. Although not surprised, I am hugely heartened by this. We must now press on and make it happen.

Passing this legislation will make Scotland the beacon in these islands for progress and equality and put us in the world’s premier league of decency. In a small but significant way, it will change our nation for the better.

Marriage is a bond of love between two people. Yet, in a country where we pride ourselves on egalitarianism, it is presently not open to everyone. The same applies to civil partnerships. These restrictions are unfair and have no place in a modern democratic society.

Denmark’s parliament has just passed equal marriage legislation. Here in Scotland too, the law can easily be changed. Our faith groups quite properly have a voice in discussion surrounding the legislative process, but they do not have an exclusive right to dictate to a society of all faiths and none. Those days are in the past. And where I recognise a majority, I recognise a minority too. Some MSPs, for varying reasons, cannot support proposals for change. We must respect their views: there’s room in Scotland for everyone.

Some faith groups will be unable to countenance this change. We must afford them that freedom of conscience. Allowances are already made for these same groups disallowing women clergy. Similarly, worshipping communities that do want to conduct marriages open to all should be free to do so.

With progressive legislation such as the smoking ban, our MSPs have already changed the face of Scotland. I’m confident they are about to be given the opportunity to do so again, and delighted they appear to have the boldness and integrity to seize it.

Alyn Smith SNP MEP

European Parliament Strasbourg