Letters: Marriage rights

Tom French (Platform, 19 May) makes an apparently plausible case for the argument that churches will not be forced to conduct same-sex marriages, but the law is by no means as clear-cut as he suggests.

The case of the bed and breakfast proprietors hounded through the courts for refusing to allow a homosexual couple to share a bed – in the proprietors’ home – shows this very clearly.

It may be true, as Mr French states, that there appear to be legal protections for churches which would not wish to conduct same-sex marriages.

However, these are ambiguous and in practice judges have consistently ruled that gay rights have priority over all others. This will apply to actions brought under European or British law.

If same-sex marriages are introduced, it would be open to any such couple to take legal action against a church refusing to marry them, as most Christian churches (in fairness, not all) would do.

Even if those churches had an arguable case, no congregation of my acquaintance could entertain the legal costs that would entail, and would be forced to close.

PETER S SMITH, LLB

Strathpeffer

Ross-shire

The couple interviewed in your report on contemporary family structures stated that marriage “holds no particular weight” for them, being just a “nice thing to do”. This reveals a superficial view of marriage. How can publicly committing oneself to a life long exclusive relationship “hold no weight”? How can making such solemn promises before the law, friends, family and God be just a “nice thing to do”? Whatever one’s view of the matter, the facts remain. Married couples tend to stay together for longer than unmarried ones. The contrast revealed in the statistics is stark.

Richard Lucas

Broomyknowe

Edinburgh