Church has led debate on sexual health strategy with initiatives to reduce abortion rate

I take great exception to the statement in your editorial comment on abortion rates (May 28) that "the Roman Catholic Church must take some responsibility for the way debate on this issue has been closed down". What is that supposed to mean? Have we not all along as a church expressed the very concern which is the subhead of your editorial, namely "Scottish sexual health strategy has failed?" As we pointed out repeatedly, it is because the strategy implied that sexual activity was all right as long as it was safe sex, instead of instilling in our young people a sense of responsibility in the exercise of their sexuality.

In reality, sex is not simply a recreational activity, but a means by which children are brought into this world and families created. I suppose for repeating this I will be called a "conservative cleric", but I cannot see why that should make me in any way responsible for closing down the debate.

As a church, we have encouraged political debate by supporting such groups as the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child; have addressed the issue of crisis pregnancies by such agencies as the Cardinal Winning Pro Life Initiative; and supported good counselling and practical help to young and not so young women through such agencies as Life and the Innocents. We have certainly been prepared to put our money where our mouth is, and I cannot see how that closes down the debate.

The Catholic Church is not against the joy of sex, but the Catholic Church, even if many of its own adherents are deaf to what it teaches, has from the beginning pointed out that once you pull apart the unitive and procreative aspects of sexual love, you create what clearly Scotland has created (and has no merit in not being alone in this) - namely, a society in which sex, particularly among the young, is less and less a sign of real commitment with a view to permanent relationship and family and more a recreational activity to be indulged in with an ever-increasing sense that it does not matter if you get pregnant because you can always at the last have an abortion. How long as a society are we going to tolerate this view? Of course, we can always blame the Catholic Church in some way for what has happened - but there is nothing new in that.

For The Herald to have made such a statement when the substance of its own remarks agreed with what we have been saying for years, is inexplicable, and I am bitterly disappointed in it.

Recently, with support from the Scottish Government, the Catholic Education Service has provided a whole series of educational materials for teachers and pupils at each stage of secondary education entitled Called to Love.

What we are seeking to do is to provide leadership not only within our own denominational schools, but hopefully outwith our schools, in showing a different way, a way that is enlightened by the Gospel we preach, and the practice of those who, in response to our teaching, have over the years established sound relationships, in which they have both fulfilled their own need to love and be loved, and provide a secure environment for those coming to birth.

Mario Conti, Archbishop of Glasgow, 196 Clyde Street, Glasgow.

SEVERAL people express their distress at the rising number of abortions in Scotland (May 28). Why are they upset? Surely in part because sexual intercourse is becoming the norm for younger teenagers and children, and with this come STDs, pregnancies, emotional and physical damage as a consequence. Also, because a significant proportion of abortions are performed upon women for whom it is not the first time the procedure has been performed; essentially it is being used as a means of contraception.

Until the 1960s, while people did take part in sex outwith marriage, it was still considered as wrong by most, and the fear of getting pregnant was itself a significant restraining influence. Our society has now largely rejected this moral stance, so restraint is absent. We entered the age of freedom from these outdated moral ideals and we are now facing the inevitable consequences. Our sexual health strategy focused on education, information and support, but placed little emphasis on the postponing of sexual activity until marriage, because that is not done in our society.

There is more education, more discussion, more media attention and more written about sex than in any previous generation. The fundamental issue is not really about poor education or information, although it can be a factor. The issue is that the older generations have promoted, by example, a lifestyle that gives the overwhelming message to younger ones that sex is fine to do if you feel like it. "Just be careful who you do it with, and take precautions," we say. We have sold our younger generations a lie, and they are paying the price. Education has to be set within a moral framework that we ourselves accept in practice.

Is there a way forward? I believe only if we are prepared to make a radical shift in our society's approach to sex and parenting. We have tried the freedom from restraints way, and it has failed. It has brought a soaring rise in marriage breakdown, with all the consequences for our children. It has brought us a huge proportion of children who only know or live with one parent, putting a significant strain on that parent, who often copes by fulfilling admirably the roles two parents were designed to play.

Society has a choice. We can commit ourselves to supporting family life, putting our partner's interests before our own, and putting all our efforts into bringing up our children by being there for them, and giving them love and security. We need to set an example, ensuring them that we have their best interests at heart. This demands commitment and sacrifice, and will take a long time to produce change. But we can start now, teaching and living the example. Our government's legislation also ought to reflect the vital necessity of the family, for family life is the foundation of society. Without that foundation, the society disintegrates. We need a vision that lifts family life back to the place in society it deserves; it is foundational.

Alasdair H B Fyfe, Consultant paediatric surgeon, 59 Mearns Road, Clarkston.

Your leader (May 28) shows remarkable ignorance of facts when it accuses the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland of "closing down debate" on matters of sexual health and sex education. Would you concede that there is no more vigorous and outspoken proponent of your statement in the same paragraph that "sex education in schools is still inadequate and too heavily focused on biology at the expense of emphasising the context of loving relationships" than the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland?

James Power, 38 Riverside Park, Netherlee, Glasgow.