Today our correspondents write about the decriminalisation of drugs, the image Scotland presents, aggressive driving and Christianity and forgiveness.
Only resolute action will tackle drugs scourge Sir, I agree with many of Dr John Cameron’s opinions but I disagree completely with his suggestion that drugs should be decriminalised (August 28) .
Dr Cameron compares drugs with alcohol and points to the failure of Prohibition in America to back up his argument but the two are entirely different in many ways.
For most people, a glass of wine or a pint of beer is part of the enjoyment of a good meal or a get-together with friends.
Binge drinking is for idiots and the idea of getting so drunk as to be unable to stand, does not appeal to anybody above the level of moron.
Even hardened drinkers can continue working and living normally between boozing sessions and live into their 60s and 70s. Only alcoholics become incapable of work, but even they can have long lives.
The very taking of drugs, however, even cannabis, brings people into contact with drug addicts and drug dealers who take and have access to harder drugs.
Once hooked, the users of heroin or cocaine become so desperate to have more that they resort to crime. Police reports show that many crimes of violence are alcohol-related, but they also reveal a closer connection between drug-taking and serial offending.
Our various governments have not been able to control the spread of drugs, not because they have been too severe, but because they have been too lenient. If they had come down hard on drug-dealing and drug-taking decades ago, we would not have the problem we have now.
Laws against them and the punishments for contravention should become even more severe and drug- taking in prisons should become impossible.
Decriminalisation of drugs has been tried in the Netherlands with dire effects. We do not want it here.
George K. McMillan.5 Mount Tabor Avenue,Perth.
Scotland must find its mettle
Sir, It is with some surprise, although I am ashamed to admit it, that I found myself agreeing with a statement by George K. McMillan (August 27).
I agree that among many “thinking Scots” there is indeed “consternation at the soft touch, foolish image our nation presents to the world”.
Where we differ, I suspect, is that I came to this conclusion some 40 years ago.
Malcolm Cordell.31 Fort Street,Broughty Ferry.
Shocking A9 driving
Sir, I am a passionate cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver, but I truly believe it is time we called time on poor driving on the A9.
I came across the fatal accident south of Dalwhinnie on Sunday, I reckon, minutes after two motorcyclists lost their lives. It was shocking, scary, cold, raining and horrific but did it change the attitude of car drivers? Not a jot.
I was riding my Harley Davidson, returning from my first, and, as a result of my experiences on the A9, my last Thunder in the Glen.
Minutes after passing the crash scene, I was chased, harassed and even verbally abused by car drivers sitting feet from my bumper until they had an opportunity to pass as I was only able to do 45mph in the driving wind and rain.
One driver of an Audi A3 sat behind me, feet from my tail for two or three miles, passed erratically then swerved in so close he nearly knocked my front wheel.
He then proceeded to give me the V sign as he swerved backwards and forwards across his lane obviously trying to mimic my driving, but in fact my wobble was entirely involuntary given the weather conditions.
There are often calls for making the motorbike test more stringent. How about every budding motorist must, first of all, pass their cycling-proficiency test followed by their Compulsory Basic Training on a 125cc motorbike then be submitted to a panel asking questions about their attitude towards other road users?
If they are prepared to accept there are other legitimate road users, to whom they should show respect, then, and only then, should they be selected to sit a test to drive a car.
Ann Blair.Ferniehill House,Stanley.
An absence of forgiveness
Sir, In her reply (August 26) to my letter, Sylvia Brown misrepresents my position and either fails to grasp, or chooses to ignore, the points I make.
I did not propose that we should return to some undefined state more natural to humanity, but asked whether evidence suggested that we were returning to a state which might be more natural to humanity than the dogma which has been imposed on us by religion.
For 2000 years, Christianity has characterised human sexuality in terms of sin. Early Christian mentors removed, even stole, our natural sexuality by claiming it was gifted by their god solely for the purpose of procreation; all other sexual activity was taboo.
From this dogma has stemmed centuries of religious invective against sex and the suppression of this human instinct. Even within the approved context of a monogamous marriage, our sexuality has been suppressed and its roles in helping build marital bonds and providing pleasure and comfort have been carved into millstones of guilt.
But those self-elected theological few who historically have claimed the right to determine the nature of our sexuality and behaviour regularly fail to meet the standards that they have set for us lesser mortals.
Does this suggest a sound foundation to the beliefs and diktats they have imposed?
History records their philandering and the gifts to their illegitimate offspring. Nowadays it falls to the media to expose their failings.
Yet, as local events show, these organisations who preach forgiveness seem incapable of forgiving the sins of their own when they are of a sexual nature.
Murray Duncan.100 Craigie Road,Perth.
Get involved: to have your say on these or any other topics, email your letter to letters@thecourier.co.uk or send to Letters Editor, The Courier, 80 Kingsway East, Dundee DD4 8SL.