We must respect the right of people to vote as they see fit

It might be bitterly disappointing, but it's not unfair. Work must continue if independence is to be achieved and the cause of a just society not only taken forward but defended.

In Scotland we have the protection of a unique legal system. One of its cornerstones is that the law takes the view that (in absence of evidence to the contrary) it is impossible to establish what an individual is thinking at any given time. Yet without evidence, people are being told they voted because they were feart, that they clung selfishly to material interest or that they were Tories.

None of us can know (unless told by them) why or how a fellow Scot voted. Even if they do (and tell us that they had based their choice on one or more of those criteria) their choice was their right and not one of us can object to it. It's democracy and something which people throughout the world are still trying to achieve by laying down their lives.

We are also protected by the Human Rights Act. This is derived from the attendant European Convention in which Article 8 enshrines the right to private and family life, Article 9 allows us freedom of thought and conscience and Article 10 protects freedom of expression. The act makes it unlawful for public bodies to interfere with any convention rights. Neither should an individual seek to breach their ethos.

Article 11 confers the right to freedom of assembly and association. Namely, whether we agree with them or not people must be able to get together and express their thoughts without interference. It was sickening to see gatherings shouted down time and time again. How can it be that any who would look to a more just future could behave that way?

Baseless and pejorative accusations concerning others' choices do not help any cause. They might fuel the passion of the self-righteous and indignant but, ultimately, they will turn many away.

From this address, there were votes cast for Yes and for No. After the count, the same convictions remain. So too does a deep respect for one another's positions. Here, it is not only recognised that, for the moment, there is no mandate for independence but also that it remains a right and just goal.

All who want to see it realised must understand that respect for the independence of the individual has to lie deep within its heart.

Kenny Wilson,

21 Union Street,

Greenock.

THANKFULLY, Doug Marr's Agenda article ("To young people who voted Yes, I am sorry for my generation's choice", The Herald, September 22) was balanced by a couple of positive and constructive letters underneath. However, I was so irritated I nearly didn't get round to reading them. Then I stopped and noticed my own reaction and wondered about it.

First, I realised I am fed up with people speaking for me. Usually, it's the First Minister telling everyone what the people of Scotland think. Now it's Doug Marr telling everyone what a whole generation thinks. Just as Alex Salmond didn't know what the people of Scotland thought, Mr Marr doesn't know why people over a certain age voted No. How could he?

Secondly, I was saddened by the sense of hopelessness: "You will be governed by self-serving politicians who abandon principles and values"; "your generation will never again have the temerity to believe you can stand on your own two feet."

If this referendum has shown us anything at all, it is that young people are now engaged in the political process and have the bit well and truly between their teeth. I am certain they will stand on their own two feet.

Certainly, this will not now happen the way Mr Marr may have wished, but the "force" is now moving south and the Union is already changing.

It would seem, from much of what is written, that both Yes and No voters have a lot in common in terms of the changes they hope for. Far from being selfish, I am certain that Mr Marr's generation, my generation, will stand alongside our new youthful political force and fight with them for these changes, for these are our children and our grandchildren, not someone else's. I am sure we will support them in achieving the prosperous and fair Scotland that we all want.

I have the greatest respect for Doug Marr as an educator and I am left wondering where he acquired such a jaundiced view of our generation. Perhaps I must look at his article for what I believe it is, an expression of anger that follows the shock at the referendum result. Hopefully that will give way to more positive feelings, and with time, our generation, Yes and No voters alike, will come together to get behind the "young people"'. We will not be selfish, surely.

David Morrish,

Pinewood, Crathes,

Banchory.

DOUG Marr asserts that the over-55 No voter cast their ballot through a selfish desire to keep their bus passes, to hold on to their pensions, to defend soaring house prices and to hold on to "our wee Christmas bonus". He also asserts that we were afraid to pay a few more pounds in tax if we gained independence.

Let me assure him that this individual voted No because I disagree with the idea that a freeze in council tax is an equitable method­ology for the redistribution of wealth. This is the money that could have assisted local government to provide vital services.

Nowhere in the White Paper was there any mention of a tax rise; instead there was to be a Corporation Tax cut, giving more money to the better off.

I also voted No to save the thousands of civil service posts that would have been put at risk by a Yes vote. Some of these posts in Scotland service the needs of the Ministry of Defence, 800 of them in Glasgow and a further 1300 in Argyll and Bute. Other posts in Northern Ireland and England would have been under threat.

I voted No to save shipbuilding on the Clyde.

I voted No because I wish to see a fair and equitable opportunity for young people to enter further or higher education. I wish to see free university education, but I do not wish this to be achieved by cutting 130,000 further education places.

I also take exception to his assertion that, "It's not as if we can't afford it. Many of us have been able to retire relatively young while in generally good health. The most fortunate amongst us live comfortably on final-salary and index-linked pension schemes".

So there you have it. He assumes that the over-55s all enjoy the same wonderful care-free existence that he enjoys as a retired headteacher.

In his entire article he makes no mention of the many retired men and women who through their free and selfless action gladly take on the role of carer and childminder.

I am also dismayed when Alex Salmond ("Salmond: Independence can happen without referendum", The Herald, September 22) identifies a particular group of voters and blames them for his failure to obtain a Yes vote. I am further dismayed when educated individuals then apply their assumptions to this demographic and label them as selfish and that they are the cause of the failure to obtain a Yes vote. This is a dangerous path to tread.

Joe Hughes,

38 Gair Crescent, Pather, Wishaw.

I FOUND Doug Marr's Agenda piece to be a masterful lament to a dream of independence lost - for now.

I hope that his insightful and incisive analysis will prompt a deal of soul-searching among those of his, and my, generation who voted No because it was the safe and comfortable thing to do -- and who may by now be wondering just what it was they thought they were voting for. While I fully respect the views of your correspondents who wish to dissociate themselves from Mr Marr's collective apology to our youngsters, I suspect there are many others who did vote No for the reasons he sets out.

The young first-time voters whose aspirations have been dashed must of course be disappointed, and perhaps disillusioned. Like all of us who voted Yes, they will also be bewildered by the unseemly aftermath of the No vote, and by the dissembling and duplicitous utterances of the political snake-oil salesmen who appeared to promise so much but who now, all too predictably, seem hell-bent on delivering so little.

Not for the first time, the people of Scotland have been sold down the river on a raft of false promises by a Westminster government which affects to care about Scotland only when their own narrow, self- seeking, interests are threatened.

I sincerely hope that this shameful betrayal will not cause our young people to turn their backs on the political process, but rather that it will galvanize them and feed in them a determination to keep the flame of hope alive.

Iain Stuart,

34 Oakbank Crescent,

Perth.

WITH few exceptions, many of my friends and acquaintances decided to cast their vote without reflecting how the result may impinge on the poor, in particular those who attend food banks through necessity. Neither did they discuss the solution to the increase in rickets in a number of our very young children.

So many words have been said on both sides of the argument. The basic problem remains the same. Severe austerity must follow whichever political party is in power and this will last for at least the next decade if we are to ever balance the books.

I feel deep shame that we in Scotland, in an attempt to preserve what we have by way of free bus passes, fuel subsidy and a fear that our pensions could be at risk, voted the way we did.

JF Kennedy will forgive me if I misquote him: do not ask what Scotland can do for you but what you can do for Scotland.

Neil Lynn,

14 Greenbourne Gardens,

Monifieth.