MADAM, I am all for freedom of speech but not for freedom of discrimination. In the 1950's and 60's "No Blacks, No Irish" was a common sign in the windows of property to let. This was commonly deemed to be acceptable just 50 years ago. However, should someone try the same approach today, they could be quite rightly charged with racial discrimination. There needs to be redefinition in all areas of life. The Bible was written many hundreds of years ago. It would be possible to find a bible reference to back up almost any view. If Christians followed its word to the letter they would still insist that God dictated that if a man dies before he has had a child with his wife, the newly widowed woman must marry her dead husband's brother (Deuteronomy). They do not because society has moved on with its views.

In this country, today it is not legal to discriminate. You cannot ask someone not to attend a school based on their gender, creed, colour or sexual orientation. You cannot refuse someone a job or a right to a fair trial by these criteria either. It would be against the law of the land and yet the Church is still able to openly discriminate against women in the case of appointing women bishops and against homosexual people in the case of marriage. As far as I know, the church has gay ministers and priests, the Church opens its doors to gay people to attend services, baptises gay people and conducts funeral services for gay people but will not sanction marriage.

In reply to Heather Lovett I am glad you recognise my views as liberal, for the dictionary definition of liberal is 'free from bigotry, open to new ideas for progress and tolerant of the ideas and behaviour of others'. To Veronica Amand, I fail to see how allowing gay couples to marry in church can lead to "a devastating impact on civil liberties", surely it would champion civil liberties. In answer to her other point, I know many single parents both male and female who do an outstanding job of raising their children with or without role models of the opposite gender. We all should seek to find excellent role models for our children and their personality and moral code are of more importance than their gender. A stable and loving home can come in many guises and marriage alone does not guarantee this. My final words are in reply to Mr Neville Fowler; "Let us consider how to spur one another on to love and good deeds". He may recognise these words from his own website "Kindness Unlimited" which seeks to help to overcome the feelings of isolation experienced by Vegetarian Christians. It would be nice to see this Christian view of unlimited kindness extended to all sectors of society who are experiencing feelings of isolation.

Sara Herriott, Ross