Rosemary Goring argues for a purely secular state freed from the corruption of institutionalised religion ("A desire for secular balance to the state", The Herald, June 17).

I, too, desire a secular state. I wish for a state in which the hopes and fears of all its citizens can be discussed openly with due time being given to the concerns of all, in a spirit, not just of tolerance, but with a determination to solve problems.

I hope for a level playing field for all who want to promote the mental, physical, emotional and spiritual health of all people as humanly as possible, to move out to those in need and, yes, towards those who profoundly disagree with us.

This is what lies at the centre of religious belief and the process by which this becomes real for the community is through institutions and groups of like-minded people. Not to have such a concrete form by which human ideas are expressed usually means the ideas are lost and cannot be shared with others.

Rosemary Goring's aversion to religion and its possibilities comes, no doubt, from her experience of it. I more than sympathise with her criticism of the way so-called religious people behave (I can hardly say I have been the perfect Christian all my life).

However, her aims and objectives, I believe, will not be accomplished by ignoring what religions have to say on the human condition and which has been codified and institutionalised for centuries. The challenge to find a 21st-century language and a new way of relating in our society will not be served by sanitising and neutralising religion in its official form, as if we can dispense with the container and still hope the water is still where we left it.

It can only be by dialogue at all levels, public and private, otherwise we risk denying basic rights, frustrating citizens at a deep level and, at worst, encouraging the very violence she rightly abhors.

Rev Dr Thomas J Shields,

20 Melville Street, Perth.

Rosemary Goring aspires to a "dispassionate and even-handed" secular Scotland.

Religion would not be "banished or persecuted", simply confined, somehow, to one's home. Churches would have to fall in line with the state, faith schools would be replaced by state schools, the state would not tolerate religious practices that do not conform to legislation and the state would not be swayed by the lobbying of those with religious convictions. One wonders how this might be effected in a tolerant and even-handed way?

As has happened time and again in world history, when we get rid of the God to whom we are all accountable, man and the state are invariably exalted into his place. Rather than being in thrall to a divine power, we might soon find ourselves, like so many in the 20th century, in thrall to a very human – and not so benevolent – power, all in the name of liberty; a modern irony indeed.

Dr Euan Dodds,

6 Considine Gardens, Edinburgh.

Rosemary Goring wants a secular society where religion is relegated to the purely private.

Knowing that religion has been the root of so many evils throughout history, spawned in our schools and communities and manifested in our battlefields, it is hard not to have sympathy with this view.

But here is the problem. Muslims, Jews and Christians all believe in the reality of God who is not a disembodied power but the creator of the universe, the one who keeps it going and the one to whom we will all be answerable.

They, and I among them, believe that all kings, rulers, governments, presidents and dictators, benevolent or despotic, are ultimately under his authority and the idea that you can simply relegate God to anywhere is totally absurd.

Crawford Mackenzie,

6 Windsor Street, Dundee.

Rosemary Goring asks us to believe that a secular Scotland would be a fairer, more tolerant and less judgemental society in which to live, free from the "pernicious" influence of religion.

The vision of the state she describes seems to be inconsistent, if not hypocritical. It seems strange to aspire to achieving greater "tolerance and respect for all" through asking for religion to be "relegated", a word which by its very meaning requires a hierarchy of importance for one set of principles over others.

As she points out, parents can currently request that their children not take part in religious lessons at school, yet she makes no obvious provision for parents to request religious education (beyond the descriptive and historical references she mentions) in a secular Scotland.

Protection of religious education, as for religious freedom in any part of our society, is a fundamental principle which the overwhelming majority of parents continue to support for their children. To seek to deny this suggests a greater degree of the intolerance which Rosemary Goring accuses religion of.

If there is such a thing as state-imposed Christianity, I fear state-imposed secularism would be far more "exclusive and excluding" through such attacks on religious observance. After all, whether or not one believes in the existence or divinity of Jesus, the message attributed to him is forgiveness and redemption for everyone. That seems inclusive to me, whether I choose to be a Christian or not.

Ian Munro,

55 Douglas Street, Motherwell.

Neil Barber "wishes only for religion to be a private matter for families" (Letters, June 15).

This appears to mean no public discussion of alternative views.

Secular views surround and impose on all of us continuously yet the Secular Society is not content with that and seeks further to limit any alternative. To reword the last sentence of Neil Barber's letter: "The Edinburgh Secular Society just wants to impose its silence on my religious belief."

Michael Elliott,

22 Bruce Avenue, Dunblane.

I am incredulous of Isobel Watt's suggestion that 16 years of "them and us" schooling has no impact on levels of adult sectarianism (Letters, June 17). To separate children according to the religious beliefs of their parents and then congratulate yourself for claiming to teach tolerance of the other is perverse.

She talks of the ethos of Catholic schools. Certainly any institution dominated by a disciplinarian, monolithic ideology will produce exam results, but is it a broader education? The exam success of schools quickly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as parents who take education seriously will move heaven and earth to get their kids into a school perceived to be high-achieving.

There is no evidence of a causal connection between supernatural beliefs and the efficacy of a school. Why would there be? A strong ethos of sport or music would similarly focus minds.

Neil Barber,

Edinburgh Secular Society,

Saughtonhall Drive, Edinburgh.

The latest revelations and predictions on the Church of Scotland's wellbeing may well occasion mixed emotions to Church of Scotland members ("£1m loss to Kirk as more quit over gay ministers", The Herald, June 17). These are: relief that persons indifferent on tolerance and respect of others should decide to rescind Church of Scotland membership; incredulity that it is the will of entire congregations to acquiesce to such en masse departure; sadness that the threat of diminishing income should be introduced to alarm already confused members.

I am grateful to The Herald for regular updates which contrast starkly with any positive Church of Scotland comment on this controversial subject.

Allan C Steele,

22 Forres Avenue, Giffnock.