SEAMUS Logan’s article in Wednesday’s paper regarding the oath of allegiance is interesting and raises questions (Only oath MPs should swear is to constituents, Oct 2).

How can someone serve the public without taking an oath they don’t believe in?

Is there an option? What would happen if the current monarch, Charlie boy, behaved in the same way as the first of that name and went against parliament? Would one still be bound to the monarch?

READ MORE: Former Yes strategist appointed as special adviser to John Swinney

Surely loyalty should be to the country and not the head of state. That’s the way Hitler went and that Trump wants to go.

Is loyalty to a person or family to be given precedence over that to a country? Surely not!

I think a review of “loyalty oaths” is long overdue in this country.

Drew Reid
Falkirk