Sir, - In making their remarks about the King's Academy, both Diana Williams, of Sowerby, and Roger A Fisken, from Burneston, (D&S letters, Aug 8) are sharing their individual faiths; Diana, a Christian, and Roger, I think, a humanist.

I declare my faith in Christianity, but also I defend the right of anyone to express opinions and theories contrary to mine.

In the opening debate on this subject, there was an inference that the teaching of religion was an act of fundamentalism, and there are people who carry out their beliefs to a point of extremism. It is those who end up as the terrorist or tyrannical master.

However in an open society like ours, and after 350 years of reform, it is our right to judge what is faith and what is humanist.

We also have the right to steer our children along the path we think is right, based upon individual experience. For anyone to declare that one or the other is wrong is itself a degree of fundamentalism.

One has only to study the Nazi, Communist and dictatorial presidential authorities since 1919 to date to realise that warnings inherent in attacks on religion, especially Christianity, by first removing the religious ethic from the children's education, then replacing it with political/humanist dogma.

Debate is important and contributes to understanding and evolution, but when it comes to faith, and the point at which an individual has resolved the issue to their satisfaction, then the decision must be respected by all, whether it is creed or politics.

If I wanted my children to have a Christian ethic in their education, then that is my right, and nothing to do with anyone else, whether political or humanist. The issue is decided by my family for my family.

What disturbs me are the people who consider they should decide my, and my family's beliefs and how or if we should be allowed to practice them.

The defence of faith is important, but the fundamentalist and extremist, whether in my faith or another, is a dangerous influence.

Both have used religion for prestige, power or materialism where the ordinary person is exploited.

What is disturbing is the fact that even now people are disguising objectives as a means to attack Christianity for power and/or material power, and because of our law, one is unable to write about it without fear of prosecution. Therefore by restraining freedom of expression, even in this some fundamentalist in the past has been successful.

ROB KENNEDY

Millfield Avenue,

Northallerton.

Clear reason?

Sir, -The European law banning the use of creosote needs more attention. Many shops, farmers and businesses will still have stocks of the product. It is used in many other products for disinfectants, washes and preservatives.

I have had chest problems for years, but when I was able, using goggles, gloves and overalls, I creosoted a large fence and doors with it. The majority of people passing said they liked the smell and it gave them a clear head. My chest was also cleaner after using it. Years ago it was used as a cough reliever, used in vaporising solutions and a drug was derived from it to treat tuberculosis.

JOHN A BARR

Brinkburn Road,

Darlington.

Question of tax

Sir, - The main reason why so called "townies" are buying farms and agricultural land (D&S, Aug 8) is the 100pc relief from inheritance tax.

There could not be a better incentive for those with much to lose through the 40pc tax on all sums over £255,000.

Of course, some of them may well like the idea of living in the countryside as an added bonus.

The only proviso is that the farm must still be in agricultural use at the time that the death of the owner occurs.

DAVID M WOODS

Marwood,

Barnard Castle.