SIR – Re George Cowley’s letter ‘He’s one of safest people in Worcester’ (Worcester News, March 15).

It is true, George and I used to know each other, and that my main career has indeed been in psychiatric nursing and, while avoiding technical terminology,I do know barmy when I see it.

It might also be true that beside the estimated IQ of 500 of Bob Churchill,I am as a mere gnat.

But George is wrong to accuse me of calling Mr Churchill barmy in my letter ‘Marriage does need a bit of TLC, but...’ (Worcester News, February 26).

It is the idea of redefining marriage that seems barmy to me.

It is not just a slight adjustment to the terminology that is being proposed, but a radical change of its character, and that to one of the longest known institutions in human history.

Marriage, as we have known it is rather like a citizen production line, and (to an intellectual gnat like me) it seems that the quality of mature, effective (or otherwise) citizens emerging as adults from the marriages of the land, largely reflects the quality and stability of marriage as a whole within the nation.

One of the biggest reasons that I oppose same-sex marriage is that I believe that it will so damage the long term quality and character of marriage as to make it unrecognisable.

If, then, the production line is changed beyond recognition, is it not highly likely that the product(s) will also be significantly different?

Call the logic simple if you like, but it still seems barmy to me to be going there.

At my age, if the proposed changes proceed,I doubt I will still be alive by the time we see the main impact on our society, but that does not absolve me of my personal responsibility to do what I can now to metaphorically shout look out.

From my perspective, the Government appears set upon an act of national self harm.

EWAN GEAR

Worcester