THE Scottish National Party (SNP) prides itself on being a tolerant, liberal outfit, partly to distance itself from darker sorts of nationalism. As part of that long-term branding effort, the manifesto on which it won a second term running Scotland's devolved government at the election in May promised to consult on new laws permitting same-sex marriages, a matter on which Westminster politicians have no say north of the border. So it was something of a surprise when one of the party's MSPs, John Mason, recently tabled a motion in the Scottish Parliament to the effect that “no person or organisation should be forced to be involved in or to approve of same-sex marriages.”

Mr Mason and the three parliamentary colleagues who supported him were promptly accused of being homophobic by leading members of their own party, as well as political opponents. But when it comes to illiberal views, some in the SNP have form. In 2000, Brian Souter, the chairman of Stagecoach, a big transport firm, and the SNP's biggest donor, is reckoned to have spent about £1m on organising a postal referendum on the repeal of a law preventing the “promotion” of homosexuality in schools (ie, teaching about it). Of the third of Scots who voted, 87% agreed with him that the law should stay (it didn't).

Research has found that since then Scottish opinion has moved, like views in the rest of Britain, towards greater acceptance of same-sex relationships. Data from the Scottish Social Attitudes survey published on August 11th showed that 61% of Scots agreed that same-sex couples should be able to marry; only 19% disagreed.

Mr Mason protests that he is not anti-gay and is “perfectly relaxed” about same-sex marriages. He says he is simply concerned that granting gays and lesbians the legal right to marry might conflict with the rights of church ministers to exclude same-sex ceremonies because of their beliefs. The next step, he thinks, will be a messy court case.

Scottish gay and lesbian campaigners think this is improbable. They want civil registrars to be obliged to carry out same-sex marriages, and for those religious organisations that want the right to conduct them—such as Quakers, Humanists, Unitarians, and some liberal Jewish groups—to get it. But they don't want to compel any church to perform such ceremonies. “From a practical point of view, I don't think many gay people would insist on being married in a church that does not welcome them,” says Alan Wardle, director of Stonewall Scotland, a campaign group.

As it happens, Westminster too seems to be discreetly booting the matter into the long grass. Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat equalities minister, said earlier in the year that the British government would start asking this summer for views on the future of gay unions in England and Wales, and how legislation might develop. But no such consultation has yet been launched, and a Home Office spokesman recently said that the government was still at the early stages of this work. It isn't only the SNP that is struggling to balance the demands of modern liberalism and old-fashioned religion.