Letter: Marriage motion must be stopped

I WELCOME the response by Alyn Smith, MEP (Insight, 7 August) to John Mason's bizarre tabled motion concerning marriage equality for same-sex couples.

The proposed motion would effectively leave same-sex couples as personae non gratae, with organisations entrusted by the state to perform unions to be allowed to boycott same-sex marriage at any time and without having to explain their decision.

In any other situation this would be overt discrimination; this is not a motion for equality. It is encouraging that this motion has been met with inter- and intra-party derision.

The recent launch of the Scottish Youth Parliament "Love Equally" campaign, I hope, will provide some example to Mr Mason and his co-signatories that equality is not ambiguous.

Alan James Mueller, Merseyside

ALYN Smith MEP wrote "Marriage is a legal and binding contract, recognised by the state as A Good Thing, and evidenced when the happy couple sign the official register. Note, and it is important, not when the religious official does whatever he or she does." (Insight, 7 August).

I am afraid Mr Smith is in error. Where a marriage is conducted in religious form, while it is unclear whether the marriage is formed when the parties exchange consent or when the celebrant declares the parties to be husband and wife (s9(3), Marriage (Sc) Act 1977) what is perfectly clear is that the parties are married before registration of the marriage by the registrar (registration being required within three days).

I am not sure what implication this error has for Mr Smith's argument. In any event, the answer is to remove religious celebrants from the picture and make the legal formation of marriage an entirely secular matter and leave the singing, dancing and praying to the individual tastes of the parties.

Brian Dempsey, Lecturer, School of Law, University of Dundee