The SNP candidate for Central Scotland,Sophia Coyle, is fast becoming the victim of a secularist witchhunt – because she is opposed to abortion, SSM, euthanasia (like many in the SNP) she is apparently not fit to be a candidate and should be hounded out – at least according to SS who have begun their witchhunt. The Herald and others seem happy to buy into this. We wait to see whether the lunatics have taken over the asylum – or whether common sense will prevail and the SNP will act as a mature liberal political party – and allow a variety of views on ‘moral’ issues. The correspondence in the Scotsman is below:
SNP candidate Coyle’s worrying agenda
That Sophia Coyle could be the SNP’s top regional list candidate in Central Scotland in next May’s Scottish Parliament election is worrying.
She pits against stem cell research, abortion, same-sex marriage, same-sex adoption, religion being given exemption from the equality act, against dying in dignity – and all because of her religious belief.
Putting this before the rights of others is unacceptable for any politician. Ms Coyle has already made her mind up how she intends to represent her constituents: it is through her church.
Spencer Fildes, Board member and former chair of the Scottish Secular Society
Letters: Secular issues
The Scotsman 2 Dec 2015
That Spencer Fides of the Scottish Secular Society should think the selection of Sophia Coyle as SNP regional candidate is “worrying” (Letters, 1 December) is itself deeply disturbing.
Apparently because she does not agree with the Scottish Secular Society’s views on abortion, same-sex marriage and euthanasia she is “unacceptable”. Is this the Brave New World that the militant secularists want us to live in – one where only those who accept certain views are eligible to be politicians?
David A Robertson, Moderator, Free Church of Scotland, St Peters Free Church, Dundee
Isn’t the idea of democracy that a diverse range of views can be presented, with the electorate deciding? A party endeavouring to be broad in its appeal, such as the SNP, is surely right to include diverse views on issues of conscience.
Secularism claims to challenge religious privilege, but usually seems to just demand that religious views be excluded because they don’t like them.
Richard Lucas, Colinton, Edinburgh
This further letter was published in response to one accusing me of being intemperate!
Sir, – Angus Brown (December 14) accuses me of “immoderate” views because I opposed the secularist witchhunt against SNP MSP candidate Sophia Coyle and yet he repeats my position exactly: that each person has a vote based on personal choice of an MSP who best fits their moral standards as well as a political choice.
The SNP, like all mainstream political parties, has not made moral questions such as abortion, same-sex marriage and euthanasia policy issues which all their candidates must uphold.
If the SNP wish to inform those of us who are opposed to abortion, SSM and euthanasia that these are core parts of their policy which none of their candidates are allowed to have opposite views on, then so be it.
They will lose mine and tens of thousands of others votes. But that is for the SNP to decide.
It is not for the secularists to tell parties who they can and cannot select, based on their own absolutist standards.
That is immoderate.
Rev David Robertson, Dundee