YOU write (Editorial, October 9) that Jim Wells, the new health minister, has strong pro-life views, but that he "should not be tempted to use his new position to impose his moral and religious beliefs on the country at large".
A politician opposed to murder, or infanticide, would certainly not be accused of attempting to impose his beliefs on the country; one opposed to the reintroduction of capital punishment would probably not face such an accusation.
It follows that such an accusation should not be levelled at a public figure who wishes to defend the right to life of the unborn. Mr Wells is making a case, rather than imposing one.
It is also hard to see why he should not allow his moral and religious beliefs to frame his approach to policy. Policy and morality are linked.
I am neither a supporter of Mr Wells's party, nor a member of his denomination, but I agree with his views on abortion.
The argument that the pro-life case cannot be expressed, or acted on, by those in public life is not sustainable, either in intellectual or practical terms.