Kate Forbes critics ought to practise what they preach

The progressive religion and the much older religion of SNP leadership hopeful Kate Forbes were always going to clash.

Her supporters must have expected a backlash.

We demand honesty of politicians. But Forbes’ forthright confession that she would have voted against gay marriage, which has been legal in Scotland since 2014, was just too straight for some.

The fact she also said she would have respected and defended the democratic choice that was made (she wasn’t an MSP then) was lost in a sea of spleen from those who think there’s no room for a Christian to lead the SNP.

The writer Jim Spence next to a quote: "the Kate Forbes case has shown many supposed progressives to be one dimensional, interested only in their own narrow causes, and not in the wider good."

Anyone who seriously believes Forbes would try to overturn the legally embedded rights of those who are now free to embark on a same sex marriage is a mischief maker.

She would never get away with it. This is a manufactured grievance.

But the reaction reveals the intolerance of progressives, who are just as dogmatic as those with beliefs that they regard as bigoted.

Kate Forbes is entitled to her beliefs, as are her critics

To her critics, Kate Forbes’ Free Church tenets may as well belong to a cult.

But they are perfectly matched by their own doctrinaire belief system.

Kate Forbes in the Scottish Parliament debating chamber. — Kate Forbes’ comments on same sex marriage have angered critics and lost her support within her own party: Image: Jane Barlow/PA Wire.

While accusing opponents of inflexibility, their own views are as rigid as the girders supporting the Tay Railway Bridge.

And they give sustenance to suspicions that Scotland is regressing in matters of conscience and free speech.

Every candidate should be quizzed robustly on their views on same sex marriage, gender reform, abortion, and every other contentious issue.

Those of all faiths and none should be rigorously examined on all the big issues of the day.

I would expect similarly robust interrogation on the cost-of-living crisis, energy policy, housing, education, health, and a dozen other areas occupying the daily lives of people.

Humza Yousaf in front of a poster which reads 'Humza for Scotland' — Humza Yousaf has also launched a bid to become first minister. Image: PA.

Ash Regan was the first candidate to throw her hat into the ring. Image: DC Thomson.

Forbes belongs to the often derided Free Church of Scotland. But if she belonged to the Martian Appreciation Society that shouldn’t matter.

She is entitled to argue according to the religious beliefs which shape her principles. Just as non-believers argue their beliefs based on whichever sources they draw them from.

Kate Forbes’ critics must not stifle debate

We are currently in the throes of a battle between those who believe that people can change who they are on a whim by self-identifying as male or female, and those who think that’s a biological nonsense.

I’m in the latter camp. But if democracy means anything, it means the right to present and argue a case and expect it to be open to criticism and even ridicule from opponents.

NEW: SNP leadership candidate Kate Forbes tells @SkyNews her faith says it’s “wrong” for children to be born outside of marriage & she would “seek to avoid”.

Also told me:

➖Trans rapist Isla Bryson is “man”.

➖NOT in favour making it easier for 16 &17yr olds to change gender. pic.twitter.com/GZNL74ODYg

— Connor Gillies (@ConnorGillies) February 21, 2023

Disagreement over policy and principles should be vigorous. But that but shouldn’t mean excluding someone from high office.

Many folk found it beyond ludicrous that Nicola Sturgeon could not formulate a view as to whether a man who had raped a woman before changing gender was actually a male.

When the offender, who now goes by the name Isla Bryson, was put in a female prison, it became clear that an overwhelming majority of the public disagreed with her incoherent stance.

And when Bryson was subsequently transferred to a man’s jail, she lost huge credibility over that issue.

Kate Forbes and Nicola Sturgeon in the Scottish Parliamenr — Kate Forbes and Nicola Sturgeon both have their critics. Image: Jane Barlow/PA Wire.

That matter proved the value of vigorous democratic discourse. And the mockery which accompanied Sturgeon’s stance, arguably added to the various reasons for her sudden resignation.

Kate Forbes should be judged on policies

There’s no reason why Kate Forbes shouldn’t be First Minister.

She should stand or fall on her policies, which are fairly conservative and not my cup of tea.

If she can’t convince folk of them she will pay the price.

But the Kate Forbes case has shown many supposed progressives to be one-dimensional, interested only in their own narrow causes, and not in the wider good.

And here’s a thought to ponder.

In attacking Forbes for her Christian beliefs they also, perhaps unthinkingly, slight many others of that faith. Good people, who give generously with time and money to help those less fortunate than themselves.