Smacks of dogma

In response to Ross Mccafferty’s article ‘Church leaders cite Bible in opposition to smacking ban’, (Scotsman, 12 March), there is mounting evidence that the only organised resistance to removing the defence of justifiable assault on children is limited to fringe groups.

This opposition is, of course,

led by the self-styled Be Reasonable campaign group, who favour the current law that grown adults should indeed be permitted to justifiably assault children. This group is funded and run by ultra-conservative religious bodies who have the delightful track record of opposing the promotion of same-sex marriage, access to contraception, access to

abortion and sex education – all because their interpretation of religious scripture tells them so.

In reality the gap in Scottish society is not between people who work with vulnerable children and the public, as they suggest. Rather, it is between those authoritarian, moralising institutions and the public, who have

long shaken off the threats of ‘eternal punishment’ for not adhering to their bygone era ethics of ‘not sparing the rod’.

It’s good to see progressive voices in the faith and belief community listen to the evidence of harm and stand up for children.

As a Humanist, I am proud to stand alongside Christians and those of other faith groups who support protecting children from violence.

Humanist Society Scotland will give evidence to the Scottish Parliament Equalities and Human Rights Committee today (15 March) on this subject.

FRASER SUTHERLAND Humanist Society Scotland,

Playfair House, Edinburgh