Sir, – I am looking forward to Scotland’s Euro 2016 qualifier against Ireland in Dublin next month but will try to avoid the starting ceremony.
This is when the tortured strains of Flower of Scotland will squeal from the speakers of the Dublin Arena.
Travelling fans will then launch an ill-timed rendition of the song with as much rhythm as a three-legged racehorse.
Meanwhile, at other qualifying matches at stadiums across Europe, fans will stand to attention as dignified national anthems are played.
I am afraid I cannot find much dignity in Flower of Scotland.
It is a good tune for a folk night at a pub and I am sure that is what the Corries intended it to be.
Showpiece song for a modern nation it is not.
It is a song locked in time. It captures a moment of folk revival and music hall nationalism of the 1960s and 1970s.
Its focus on battles past and whimsical hill and glen scenes do not reflect what this country is about.
It does not even reflect what this country was once about.
Flower of Scotland leapfrogs a great swathe of history including our contribution to scientific, industrial and technological advances in the world.
It makes no mention of the Scots of the Enlightenment whose promotion of reason put Scotland on a distinct path in the world.
It is an inward-looking sullen dirge of a nation that has forgotten where it came from.
We could trawl our national archives for a replacement song but would it not be better to start afresh by commissioning an new anthem for Scotland?
Bob Ferguson. North Muirton, Perth.
Don’t take Bible at face value
Sir, – Once again we get another correspondent, this time Gordon Kennedy, (May 21) quoting from the Bible, saying marriage is between a man and a woman.
Why do we get people quoting certain paragraphs from the Bible?
Mr Kennedy wants us to believe that everything in the Bible that was written 2000 years ago is factual.
I would like to ask Mr Kennedy what he thinks of the passages in Deuteronomy which state that if a woman sleeps with another man she shall be stoned to death outside the city wall.
In my life I have not seen much stoning of women in Perth, Dundee or Broughty Ferry.
Perhaps Mr Kennedy can enlighten us and prove that the stoning of women should happen.
Life and man has moved on. So should people like your correspondent Mr Kennedy.
Billy Williamson. Ferry Road, Monifieth.
Patchy church marriage record
Sir, – For the church to pretend to have always been the guardian of marriage is disingenuous since for the first millennium it did not even have a ceremony to celebrate it.
Some Christian groups expressly forbade it and, while the pre-Reformation church accepted the need for reproduction, it always placed celibacy on a much higher moral plain.
Marriage was a concession to human weakness and, to make its position even more absurd, women were regarded then, much as gay men are today, as agents of depravity.
Rev Dr John Cameron. 10 Howard Place, St Andrews.
PR would slash SNP majority
Sir, – Your correspondent Fiona Hannah asked if anyone had calculated what the General Election outcome in Scotland would have been had it been decided under proportional representation.
I decided a few days ago to investigate that particular point for myself and the results for Scotland utilising PR would have been as follows: SNP, 30 MPs (not 56) 50.2%; Labour, 14 MPs (not one) 24.2%; Liberal Democrats,four MPs(not one) 7.55%; Conservative, nine MPs (not one) 14.8%; UKIP one MP, (not zero) 1.61%.
The remaining 1.61% or thereabout was spread over the Greens plus around three to four others.
For what its worth, if the number of 16 and 17 year olds voting in the Scottish Referendum were removed from the overall SNP vote, the total number of votes would have been reduced to 1,540,221 instead of the 1,617,989 total achieved.
If we compare this number to the total votes in the recent General Election for the SNP (1,450,304 ), it shows that the number of voters lost by the SNP was around 90,000.
In my view, from the aforementioned figures highlighted, the quicker proportional representation is introduced the better for our country.
It will lead to fairer and better representation for all.
Thereafter, we then just have to hope that those who have been elected will bear that in mind.
Bob Tennant. 37 Dawson Crescent. Monifieth.
Children must be put first
Sir, – It gave us no pleasure to see a former candidate on the Apprentice television show receive a prison sentence last week for sabotaging her son’s court -ordered contact time with his father.
However, it may serve a purpose if it reminds parents with care that a contact order is not optional.
We at Families Need Fathers Scotland see examples every week where the intentions of the court are frustrated when children are not presented for their specified time with the non-resident parent for the flimsiest of reasons.
This damages the relationship between the children and their non-resident parent, usually the father and creates further tension between the separated parents.
The sheriff in Perth gave many warnings before finding the accused in contempt of court.
We feel the courts should take a grip of these failures to obey orders much earlier.
Courts should remind both parents that it is their duty actively to promote a good relationship between the children and their former partner.
There is a raft of research that shows children do better in all aspects of their life when both parents are fully involved in supporting them.
Estranged partners do not have to like each other as individuals but they should respect each other as parents.
That is what putting the children first means.
Ian Maxwell. National Manager, Families Need Fathers, Scotland.