Where will changes to marriage end?
The uniqueness of marriage being contracted between a man and woman is to be found in all culture and eras. For a parliament to seek to redefine marriage is an usurpation of the natural law and is fraught with dangers for the stability of the society.
If one allows homosexual couples to marry then why would we, as a society, not then allow polygamous or polyandric unions? How about if people wanted group marriages? Why not have human and animal marriages too? If one’s only criteria for changing the definition of marriage is to promote “equality” or to end “discrimination” then the aforementioned scenarios should be considered. To undermine the institution of marriage will only lead to instability in communities and to trivialise that which has for millennia served Scotland well.
Andrew Gray, Edinburgh