I OBJECT most strongly to the fact that if I choose to vote for Kate Forbes in her SNP leadership bid, then according to Kelly Given I belong to a certain “privileged’ class of the male gender (Privileged men, stand down: we know human rights don’t matter to you, Mar 19).

If I chose to vote for Kate Forbes it would have nothing to do with her Christian values – in which I have no interest, being an agnostic. Some of the other Christian values she possesses are honesty and truthfulness, which I also hold in esteem, inespecial with politicians.

READ MORE: Political naivety I’ve seen in the past few days has been breathtaking

Kate Forbes has stated categorically and now on several occasions that regardless of her so-called Christian values she will respect and support the Scottish laws in place that offer protection to members of the public.

I refer, of course, to equal marriage and abortion. I too have every respect for these two facets Kelly Given has referred to in her the Sunday National article.

Whilst I might live a more middle-class way of life, I in no way possess middle-class values, having been born, bred, schooled and worked in a working-class background. Only hard work has given me what I materially possess. Certainly not privilege.

READ MORE: Times Radio to host SNP leadership debate - here's how to watch

So, Kelly Given, please do not place all your so-called “privileged men” (whatever that might mean to yourself) into one group. We are not all so narrow-minded as  to not care about equality and equal rights in any society, let alone a Scottish society.

I am now retired, but in my mature student years and subsequent employment I was a well-ensconced trade union man who fought for equal rights in the workplace, whether college or university, over a period of around 30 years. My remit was a lot wider than the references Kelly Given has used.

Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife

WOW! What an self-opinionated, arrogant, entitled column in Seven Days by Kelly Given. Her article opines it is her way or no way, everyone else’s opinions have no relevance in Scotland and no-one is entitled to have their preferences represented in government unless they concur with her views. That doesn’t sound like democracy to me.

Kelly’s article makes assumptions about Kate Forbes that have scant basis in reality, I don’t know where or how she formed her opinions but it certainly wasn’t from listening to what Kate Forbes said and it sounded as though she was transposing her own assumptions on to Kate which, if the scenario had been reversed, Kelly would have been outraged.

The article read like the worst mainstream media rants and if it is supposed to help us gain independence, it is more likely to do the opposite.

Christine Smith
Troon

READ MORE: Kate Forbes: I would 'like to get to end' of leadership contest

I AM disappointed that Sunday National saw fit to publish Kelly Given’s article, since it was composed of such vitriol and malevolence, full of unsubstantiated allegations (eg “privileged men lining up behind Kate Forbes”). Is this an example of the level of tolerance that independence supporters are trying to portray?

Mary Clark
via email

IT’S little wonder the media and opposition are keen to focus on SNP membership. Every opportunity is taken by them (the media and opposition) to take the focus off the dismal membership figures of the other main parties (we must not forget to thank Ash Regan for her efforts in this process).

A look at the House of Commons Library website in their section titled “Party membership as estimated share of relevant electorate”, updated to the end of 2022, shows that as a percentage the SNP had 2.46% of the electorate as members, far ahead of all other parties. Labour has 35% of the SNP figure, Conservative 15.6%, Lib Dems 6.5% and the Greens 3.9%. (Those figures are extrapolated from an online graph but are believed to be accurate to +/- 0.1%).

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: SNP 'mishandled' members row but 'perspective' needed

After such a long period in government, this record of the SNP has no equal that I am aware of and is one that all members should be proud of. If all current party members in positions of power can remember that the cause is much bigger than their individual egos, and in some cases their abilities, then we’re on a course to win.

RG Clark
Gorebridge

P DAVIDSON of Falkirk (Letter, Mar 17) asks “is child care only work when carried out by someone outwith the family?”

Yes. Looking after your own kids is not “work”, it is a sacred duty. Kids are like farts, everyone else’s stink and looking after other people’s children is most certainly a job of work.

Affordable child care is absolutely essential to working parents. If you are fortunate enough to be able to remain at home and raise your kids, then do so. Don’t expect payment though. You are not working. You are raising your children. Since when did this deserve state funding?

I say this as a parent who has worked and stayed at home.

Rory Bulloch
Glasgow