CANDIDATES hoping to be elected for Shetland at the upcoming Holyrood election have spoken out about one hopeful standing on an anti-gay marriage stance.
Peter Tait, who is standing as an independent, said Covid-19 is “possibly related” to gay marriage, according to the Shetland Times.
Tait, a former mussel farmer, is standing for election on the single-issue of opposing same-sex marriage. He told the local newspaper that he made the decision to do so because of his religious beliefs, adding: “I’m representing as best I can things that God would want me to represent.”
Asked if he expects a backlash against his beliefs, Tait said: “I suppose there likely will.”
READ MORE: Yes election 2021 #1: Tide is turning away from Unionist party in Shetland
The candidate ran in the 2019 Shetland by-election, pledging to reintroduce the Scottish monarchy to the UK if he was successful. However, he came in last place with just 31 votes.
Candidates have criticised Tait’s platform. SNP candidate Tom Wills (below) told Shetland News: “I support everyone’s right to marry whoever they like. We can’t know for sure if Peter Tait is sincere or just seeking attention, but his views are out of place in the 21st century.”
Meanwhile, Scottish Labour hopeful Martin Kerr said his party “supports the rights of gay people to marry”.
LibDem candidate Beatrice Wishart said that Tait’s comments “don’t belong in the 21st century”.
The Highlands and Islands lead Greens candidate, Arianne Burgess, urged Tait to say sorry.
“Many people will be appalled by Peter Tait’s views,” she said. “This kind of outdated prejudice is exactly the sort of politics that we should be moving away from.
“Equal marriage was a major achievement, and has meant so much to couples across Shetland and beyond.
“In comparison Covid is a deadly virus that has caused heartache and misery to families all over the world. I urge Mr Tait to reconsider his comments and apologise for them.”
READ MORE: Tom Wills: I’m very aware how different things could be
In response, Tait denied being an “attention seeker” but said he would not apologise for his remarks.
However, he said his comments may have been different if he were not taking questions on the phone.
He told Shetland News he had no policy proposals on local issues which will be debated ahead of the May 6 vote.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel