REV Bill Wallace (Letters, June 16) claims the questions put to Tim Farron about his views on same-sex activity sprang from the assumption that he had an out-of-step Biblical view. To assume another's view, however, creates little incentive to ask about it, so it is more likely that the questioners only thought it possible that Mr Farron saw gay sex as wrong and wanted to know for sure.

By asking, they threw him a chance to quash any assumptions or suspicions, but instead of catching it first time, he ducked, creating the impression that a man aspiring to national leadership was shy of an inquiry into his moral views. When interviewers help us distinguish between politicians who are fully open about their moral views and those who are not, they deserve the thanks of all voters who believe politics should not be disconnected from morality.

Rev Wallace complains that some views are scarcely permitted, but politicians are free to express the view that gay sex is wrong, just as they are free to say that inter-racial marriage is wrong or a woman's place is in the home. What they might not be permitted to do is keep their seats or represent their parties, since voters and parties have a right to reject candidates and applicants on the basis of their views.

Rev Wallace thinks society should "not allow minority groups to dominate society’s attitude", but attitudes to gay sex in this country are dominated by those who see nothing wrong in it, and they are not a minority group.

Robert Canning,

Secular Scotland, 58a Broughton Street, Edinburgh.