Today’s letters to The Courier.
Sir, – I had occasion to check train times from Edinburgh to Leuchars, noting, at the same time, the fares quoted for a single journey. The fares were for travel on the same day I checked the fares, not in advance of travel.
Each fare for a Wednesday afternoon was £12.60. Having read of the concern about fares to Dundee, I checked these, too, and found that, for the same trains, the cheapest fare was £17.50 for the earliest train and the others were all quoted at £22.70.
The single fare from Leuchars to Dundee for all these trains was £4.60. Thus, passengers travelling from Edinburgh to Dundee are being overcharged by 30p or £5.50, depending on the time of the train.
Alternatively, one could buy a ticket from Edinburgh to Kirkcaldy for £7.10 and from Kirkcaldy to Dundee for £11.90, a total of £19, still a saving of £3.70.
I hope that potential passengers will check the alternatives available as dividing the journey into two parts Dundee to a station in Fife, then on to Edinburgh could save over £5 on single journey.
Train fares are certainly a mystery.
Ruth Gordon,Willowbrae,Tayport.
The sophistry behind going it alone
Sir, – Both councillor Neal Hanvey and Conor Watt react (Letters, July 13 and 17) to the ”diatribes” of Jenny Hjul by promoting the irrational, irresponsible and illogical illusion of independence more correctly described as separation.
It is irrational because if we really need what the SNP says that we need, we only have to use the democratic power we already possess to get it.
It is irresponsible because in these hard-up times we cannot afford the millions this divisive debate has already cost.
It is illogical because separatism and nationalism will not allow us to escape, inter alia, from our responsibilities vis-a-vis security, defence etc, but will leave us at the mercy of whatever big brother is willing to help us.
The British Empire may no longer be with us but Great Britain is a better security bet than a separated Scotland.
It is an illusion, using smoke and mirrors to cover up the attempt not so much to give us ”independence” as to switch power from one group of politicians to the other and, in the process, to abandon principle in favour of sophistry.
Andrew Lawson,MacLaren Gardens,Dundee.
Killing in the name of God
Sir, – The Reverend Andrew Mumford (Letters, July 18) quotes the catechism of the Roman Catholic church to illustrate a widely-held Christian belief that acts of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, one which ”merits firm and unequivocal condemnation.”
However, God demands such massacres in the Bible. For example, in the passage in Deuteronomy 13:13-19, God commands that the inhabitants of an entire town be wiped out if anyone is found suggesting the worship of a different god.
The order even specifies killing the livestock, although why dumb animals should be slaughtered is not clear. There are several other similar commands throughout the Bible, specifying that men, women, children and animals should be slaughtered indiscriminately.
I would be interested in how the Reverend reconciles this clear dichotomy between God’s biblical commands and Christian practice in His name.
Alistair McBay,National Secular Society,Atholl Terrace,Edinburgh.
Mad dogs and soaked Scots
Sir, – While mad dogs, Englishmen and daft jute wallahs may well have gone out in the Indian midday sun, spare a thought for all the present-day Scots who have to go out in this incessant deluge sans sunlight.
Following Darwin’s evolutionary theory, we can expect to sprout gills before too long, next would come scales and fins. Of course, there would be certain benefits from such regressive developments there would be no further need of clothes or oil-burning motor vehicles, we would be as free as fishes (until nabbed by sharks).
Kenneth Miln,Fothringham Drive,Monifieth.
Zombies in cyberspace
Sir, – What is it with the present generation of parents/minders etc who totally disregard their charges be it children or dogs when they are on their mobiles?
I have seen buggies being pushed off the kerb on to dangerous roads by one-handed zombies who are deep in cyberspace, a dog running after a ball thrown into a raging river and children capering along dangerous cliff paths while their parents were some distance ahead, blissfully unaware of the situation behind them.
Has common sense disappeared altogether or are some parents simply not taking their responsibilities seriously enough?
Being in charge of a child or dog has to be taken seriously and demands total concentration. They are much more important than the meaningless trivia being exchanged by the great majority of people on their mobiles.
Bob Smart,Bellevue Gardens,Arbroath.
It’s the adults who need help
Sir, – Smacking children? (Wednesday’s Courier). I agree with Murdo Fraser. We already have sufficient child protection legislation.
Looking at the behaviour of some of today’s children, it is we adults who need the protection.
A. T. Geddie,Carleton Ave,Glenrothes.
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. Letters should be accompanied by an address and a daytime telephone number.