ONE of the topics that has generated much debate in these columns in recent weeks is the equalisation of the age of consent for couples, mixed or same sex.

The States’ unanimous decision to bring it down to 16 was the right one and it is clear from the volume of correspondence here that islanders generally agree with that.

It is a welcome sign of how communities develop and how the concept of inclusiveness and a dislike of discrimination is widespread.

Two writers, a GP and a churchman, have attracted a lot of the comment and that cannot have been comfortable for them. What the flow of opinions demonstrated, however, is that islanders feel very strongly that discrimination is unacceptable.

A number of writers have criticised or questioned this newspaper for allowing correspondence that has been strongly worded and taken as personal attacks on those supporting one or other side of the debate: to equalise the age of consent or not.

The decision to publish some letters has been difficult because of the personal nature of them. Equally, the GP and the churchman wanted to go public with their views, so would it be right to block a counter view because it might cause them offence?

Opinion expresses the newspaper’s view on a range of topics but does not seek to duck the consequences of those views by refusing to publish opposing comments or criticism.

Debate, we believe, needs to be robust and there has been much passion here of late, which is no bad thing.

The prospect of a mass-burn incinerator clearly fired up the community and that changed policy.

We look for ways to publish, rather than seek reasons not to do so, because of the need for open debate.

However, these pages, more than any of the others in the Guernsey Press, are the domain of readers and are the island’s forum.

It is how our correspondents want them run that matters and we are pleased to receive feedback.

So, should we tone down heated letters or let them through and run the risk of upsetting those criticised?