YOUR correspondent Neil Barber of the Edinburgh Secular Society (Letters, July19) comments, seemingly without irony, that "distasteful private religious views are one thing, but it is quite another for this individual to continue to be chaplain at a Scottish university." Or, to put it another way, "I'll tolerate your disgusting behaviour provided you do it in the privacy of your own home, but your offensiveness should be banned from public view". This is precisely the same mindset which when directed against sexual minorities, gave rise to Pride events in the first place.
Similarly undeterred by internal coherence of argument, Glasgow Caledonian University has sacked Father Mark Morris on the grounds that it is "strongly inclusive and committed to supporting equality and diversity on campus" – except of course equality and diversity for orthodox Catholics. I struggle to determine which is the more sinister of these institutions' faults – their malevolent contempt for freedom and tolerance, or their lack of self-awareness of the same.
Chris McLaughlin,
99 Rockmount Avenue,
Thornliebank, Glasgow.
I WRITE to answer Martin Conroy's questions (Letters, July 20).
Neil Barber does not believe that all who pray the Rosary should be dismissed from whatever job they do. Praying for sexual sinners should not lead to loss of paid employment if job performance is unaffected, and it should not be criminalised. The "secular Gestapo" will not be kicking in all the doors of those who own a Rosary and carting them off never to be seen or heard of again, because there is no such organisation.
What actually happened is that some people in charge of Glasgow Caledonian University decided that the person they'd welcomed as a chaplain was no longer welcome on account of his offensive behaviour. He had a right to respond to Gay Pride as he did, and they had a right to respond to his response as they did. No rights were infringed, and Father Morris still has his freedom to lead prayers against whatever he thinks his god dislikes.
I hope Mr Conroy can now feel that his anxieties were disproportionate.
Robert Canning,
Secular Scotland, 58a Broughton Street, Edinburgh.
I HAVE been following the story of the Pride Parade and the response of some Christians with interest, including Martin Conroy's contribution to the Letters Page. And I ponder, how do we reconcile an ability to freely choose lifestyles both secular and religious without rancour? As a Catholic living in 21st century Scotland it has been necessary to open my mind and heart to the impact of new legislation and see the good in tolerance and respect for all.
However, in order to have a truly tolerant Scottish society this has to cut both ways. Catholic beliefs and practices in Scotland deserve greater respect and understanding from some secular interests. To build the tolerant, safe and compassionate Scotland that we all want requires a commitment from both religious and secular groups to respect and recognise the right of the other to hold views contrary to theirs.
Roddy MacDonald,
1 Glenmount Place, Ayr.
I WOULD like to congratulate Father Morris, chaplain of Glasgow Caledonian University, for holding a service "to atone for the Glasgow Pride march offence" ("University chaplain holds service to atone for Pride march 'offence'", The Herald, The Herald, July 18). I believe that most chaplains, priests or religious persons from all religions do not condone homosexuality, because their respective religion forbids it and considers it a cardinal sin. However, afraid of the libertarians, very few persons have the courage to express such feelings in public. Father Morris has shown that courage and his commitment to his religion by holding that service. God bless him and add to his courage.
Bashir Maan,
46 Leggatston Avenue, Glasgow.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel