Humility is meant to be a Christian virtue, but I see no trace of it when representatives from selected Scottish churches sit in seats legally reserved for them on council education committees (Churches win fight to rule on schools, News, November 16).
There, they enjoy the same voting rights as councillors but without any need to seek election, and hence without any accountability to the taxpayers who fund state education.
This is arrogant, elitist behaviour, which laughs in the face of democracy and equality, and I am disappointed that John Finnie MSP has abandoned his attempt to press the issue at Holyrood.
If Rev Sally Foster-Fulton of the Church of Scotland is correct that church representatives add value to the committees, could she please explain what kind of value they add, what valuable abilities they possess that others don't, and why they cannot use those abilities to get themselves fairly elected?
Christianity is often described as a great force for social good. If so, it should be able to earn its influence on merit instead of relying on legally enshrined privilege.
This fight is not over.
Robert Canning
Bridge of Earn
After giving up on a private member's bill, John Finnie MSP has delayed our ambition to end the theocratic governance of Scottish education. He claims it was after receiving a mere 260 pro-forma letters in opposition. As a campaign group for secular democracy, had Mr Finnie suggested this was a petition we would have responded like churches and got our members to fill out pro-forma letters to support the abolition of unelected religious affiliates on all of Scotland's education committees.
Garry Otton
Secretary, Scottish Secular Society
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article