The world of the children 1
Kenneth Roy
The world of the children 2
Angus Skinner and others
The world of the children 3
Maggie Mellon
The disease is spreading: photograph by Douglas Wood
I think Mr Roy is comparing the standard of written English of the very small academic elite who went to university in the 50s and 60s with that of the much larger cohort who do so now. I suspect that the vast majority of school leavers in Malcolm Muggeridge’s time were less literate than their modern day counterparts. A 2009 study of levels of literacy by the Scottish Government found that while there does appear to be a problem with the 16-25 group, the general trend is that younger people are more likely to be functionally literate than those who are older. I tentatively speculate that the rise of mass university education might even have played a part in this.
I also think that it’s important to distinguish between a person choosing, or being able, to write in accordance with what are perceived to be the formal rules of ‘standard’ English grammar, and a person’s ability to write in a manner that will be understood by their intended audience. The ‘abuse’ of the apostrophe, while it grates on me as a reader, probably occurs because it is so rare that the apostrophe actually conveys any information that cannot be determined from context. I know what an Egg’s Benedict is. One doesn’t see the more fundamental rules of English grammar – the subject/verb/object word order for instance – being flouted in the same way (not flaunted). Perhaps we can simply do without the apostrophe.
Patrick Down
The Church of Scotland minister who officiated (is that the correct term?) at the execution of Henry John Burnett (25 September) was the Rev John Dickson. John was the minister of Torry St Fittick’s church next door to Craiginches prison where the execution took place. It was my privilege to be John’s elder in his latter years.
His life was altered in a quite dramatic fashion following the execution. He took to drink (but still remained a successful functioning minister). Everyone who knew him said that the execution left a very large scar on his life. He died about three
years ago.
David Birkmyre
Surprisingly, perhaps, nothing in Bob Cant’s letter addresses that injustice, which has hurt good people and led to the closure of Catholic adoption agencies. Instead, we are apparently to be consoled by the fact that there are worse things in the world. If Bob (which God forbid) were ever to be burgled, should we look forward to him rejoicing if the police told him that he should focus on thanking his lucky stars he was not murdered? I, too, am concerned about the things Bob mentions, including climate change and Christian martyrdom, but I do not see why he thinks concern at one issue automatically implies that one is unconcerned about others.
So, there is no question of my attacking human rights – I just do not think that one person’s human rights should be exalted at the expense of others. This is malice, not democracy. Human rights campaigners who engage in it are undermining the basis of democracy, by using their liberalism as a cloak to attack innocent people. If you wish a pluralistic society, Christians who disapprove of homosexuality will have to borne with.
Unlike the false parallel of racism (the old chestnut used to exclude disapproval of homosexuality among B&B owners), the Bible gives warnings against homosexual practices (both in Hebrew and Greek), which no committed Christian can ignore. Of course, Christians suffer blasphemous behaviour in Britain daily; yet they do not wish to attack homosexuals: they simply want state protection to stop homosexuals attacking them.
I understand that even the gay actor, Rupert Everett, has attracted a violent reaction for disagreeing with gay marriage. It is time to recognise that the current imbalance of rights is risking self-righteous violence against contrary views – not only against conservative Christians, but gay people who dare to voice other opinions. It is a national scandal that axe-grinding activists may use the court system to advance their hostile agendas.
This is what I meant by pseudo-liberalism, to turn to Ian Petrie, not theological liberalism per se. As I once observed in an article in SR, despite not sharing the liberal position, it clearly has its own integrity. Rather, my quarrel is with a dishonesty that professes to exalt freedom, while trying to deny it to others. (I do not include church weddings in that, because no-one in society has any automatic right to the sacraments.)
I regarded as despicable and cowardly the expressed hope of the Scottish Government that activists should be nice to people like me and Rupert Everett. Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond must know that they have run scared of political correctness. Sadly, they showed themselves unworthy of the history of our nation by a piece of flashy PR. Any society that cannot protect one part of its people from another is destined to fail and, as a result, I resigned from the Scottish National Party, diverting my monthly SNP donations to charity.
So, while I respect Bob and Ian’s right to hold different views, I am determined to uphold the right of those in the Christian community who adhere to biblical values not to be persecuted in the name of ‘human rights’.
Bruce Gardner
When I quoted the opening four lines from ‘The Shipyard Apprentice’ by Archie Miller in my autobiography ‘No Love Here’, I thought that it was a poem. Now, Ray Templeton advises me that it is in fact a folk song. In addition, Archie Miller had help in composing the song from the persons named in his letter. I am most grateful to Ray for this invaluable information.
Martin Gordon
The Cafe is our readers’ forum. Send your contribution to islay@scottishreview.net
website design by Big Blue Dogwebsite development by NSD Web