I am writing to respond to your story June 15 about the refusal of Sevenoaks Alliance Church to allow a Sikh funeral in its premises, and to comment on your editorial of June 18 on the topic.

Your editorial says, “At its simplest, a church is just a building. Does it make a difference what kind of funeral is held within its walls?”

Some Christians might agree with this view, but many do not. Some believe that the facility has been built and operated with the tithes and offerings that believers gave to God and has been formally dedicated to the worship of God through Jesus Christ as the only “true” way.

The biblical word for this is sanctified which means holy or set aside for God. No religion which believes in holy places can be expected to welcome the performing of the rites of worship of another deity on its holy ground.

There is also the fact that church organizations are not public bodies, and are not bound by human rights legislation which forbids discrimination of the basis of religion.

To require that of a religious body would be ridiculous. Furthermore, their property is private property. If someone came to the door of your home and wanted to rent your lovely patio and swimming pool for an event, do you think it would automatically be considered discrimination to decline, regardless of the age, gender, race or religion of the person asking?

I do agree with the thrust of your editorial which is that if Mr. Gill really wanted to be helpful in promoting harmonious inter-faith relations, he would not publicly poke someone in the eye with his sharp stick of inflammatory rhetoric.

Lorne Welwood