I AM one of those who has accused some opponents of the proposal for same-sex marriage of intolerance.

As such, I relish Archbishop Conti's challenge to ask myself whether I am not also being intolerant (Letters, December 6). I am happy to assure him, with a certainty to match his own, that I am not.

Intolerance does not mean, as the Archbishop postulates, simply disagreeing with others; that is debate. To me, intolerance means the small-minded conviction that, for reasons determined by myself, others do not deserve the same rights as I do.

The right to marry has long been available to opposite-sex couples who choose to publicly demonstrate their commitment to each other in that way. The Scottish Government proposes to extend that right to same-sex couples, in the name of equality and diversity. The Government's commendably open consultation document recognises that the proposal will be contentious for many, and invites the views of us all before the matter is debated and decided in the Scottish Parliament. All views expressed will, thankfully, be treated with equal respect by our forward-looking Government.

Although marriage has been adopted as an integral component of many religions, the institution of marriage does not belong to any one group, religious or otherwise. Similarly, the concept of procreation as a function of marriage only, while fundamental to some religions, is not legally or morally binding on any couple. Neither is the begetting of children a compulsory legal or moral requirement of marriage.

Archbishop Conti claims that if same-sex marriage is right, no harm will be done, and that if it is wrong then inevitably it will cause harm. I prefer to say that if same-sex marriage is shown to do no harm, then it is right; and if it is shown to do harm, then it is wrong and should be revoked. To deny equal rights to minorities on the ground that they may turn out to be harmful seems to me perverse.

Iain Stuart,

34 Oakbank Crescent,

Perth.

Although I respect the process of discernment that is going on within both the Church of Scotland and to an extent, the Scottish Episcopal Church, I am disappointed that they have not felt able to support the Scottish Government's plans for legislation to provide equality for all Scottish citizens to marry whomever they, choose regardless of gender. The Unitarian Church has long held that the ability to love and form a life-long relationship with another person, of the same or the opposite sex, is a gift from God. We strongly believe that the partners in such loving relationships should be welcomed to solemnise their relationships publicly and in the presence of God. We have for some time provided services of blessing for same-sex couples, but we wish to be able to treat such couples with full equality, by officiating at legally recognised marriages, as we do for heterosexual couples.

We support the right of any religious organisation or individual celebrant to decline to provide this service, if their theological understanding of marriage differs from ours. The current proposals for legislation on this issue clearly state that no organisation or celebrant will be required to officiate at a same-sex marriage. We therefore call on the Scottish Government not to be swayed by the responses of churches opposed to equal marriage, who will be able to opt out, and to ensure that those religious organisations who wish do so, will be enabled to provide ceremonies of marriage to all loving couples.

(Rev) Maud Robinson,

Scottish Unitarian Association,

c/o Unitarians in Edinburgh,

7 Castle Terrace,

Edinburgh.

Dr John Cameron refers to the Kirk's Legal Questions Committee as a "group of dusty record-keepers" in relation to their response to the consultation document, The Registration of Civil Partnerships and Same-Sex Marriage (Letters, December 3). His frustration is understandable. If, however, one reads the introductory comments in the committee's report, a quite different picture emerges. The committee describes its report as articulating the Kirk's current position, offering a "freeze-frame image captured from the church's developing response to the real, live issues involved".

The committee refers to the Theological Commission, appointed by the Kirk's General Assembly in May 2001, whose remit includes "a theological discussion of issues around same-sex relationships, civil partnerships and marriage". The Kirk is in the midst of an ongoing examination of these issues, the results of which will be presented to the General Assembly in 2013. Its current view on the issue is not set in tablets of stone.

The committee states that its answers to the Scottish Government's consultation should be read in the light of its introductory comments which set out the process by which the Kirk's views on contemporary issues are confirmed or amended. The committee's full report can be read on the Church of Scotland website.

Iain Gray,

39 Roman Road,

Bearsden.

The issue of same sex marriages within the Scottish Sikh community is a complex one.

The Scottish Sikh community is a diverse one, largely made up of first-generation migrants from India and second-generation Sikhs born and bred in Scotland. It is unfortunate that the timescales of this consultation do not allow for a thorough and extensive opportunity to explore the history of marriage within Sikhism or the views of the diverse Sikh community.

Marriages within the Sikh faith are traditionally between man and woman as advocated by the Akal Takhat, the highest Sikh authority and the Sikh tenets and code of conduct. Historical references from the Sikh Gurus show that marriage for pro-creation purposes is of the utmost importance, signifying the need for spiritual and family balance.

The Guru Granth Sahib Ji – the Sikh scriptures – is the guide for Sikhs worldwide. However, there is no explicit reference to same-sex marriages. This aside, there is extensive mention of pro-creation, highlighting the importance of a mother and a father. It can be deduced from this evidence that a Sikh marriage must always remain between man and woman.

This aside, Sikhs believe in equality of opportunity for all. Gay Sikhs should have the right to recognition of their relationship. Therefore our recommendation is that the spirit of this consultation be approved but it should be left to individual religious institutions to decide whether to conduct a same-sex marriage within a religious institution or give a religious blessing to a same-sex couple.

Anoop Wallia,

Sikhs in Scotland,

134 Berkeley Street,

Glasgow.