Kate Forbes, who wants to be the next First Minister of Scotland, has said she would not have voted for equal marriage had she been in Parliament when it was voted through in 2014.

She has sparked a debate, mostly about her own views on equality issues but it also raises questions about the role of people who express a faith can or should have in political decision-making.

Kate Forbes is not unique.

READ MORE:Kate Forbes: children outside marriage 'wrong' according to her faith

She is by no means the only MSP who has a faith and is not the only one who is open about her religious beliefs.

Kate Forbes is not even the only MSP who says she would vote on certain issues on the basis of her faith.

Several have, on occasion, voted against their party line or abstained in a vote on the grounds of conscience based on their religious beliefs.

The views expressed honestly by Kate Forbes put her at odds with her own party and the Scottish Parliament on equalities.

Her statements on equal marriage and children born out of marriage will be uncomfortable at best and alarming for many people.

People will be worried that if someone who holds these views was to be First Minister then any further moves towards a more equal society will not be on her agenda.

READ MORE: SNP leadership hopefuls make pitch on independence strategy

They would rightly fear that progress made over recent decades would be undermined.

It has been proposed that criticism of Kate Forbes, is dangerous and could lead to the exclusion of people of faith from public office.

That view doesn’t hold water as there are many people who have a deeply held faith but do not allow it to influence their role as lawmakers, and who genuinely believe in and actively promote equality.

Some do, as mentioned earlier, some people have opted out of their party line or voted in line with their faith when given a free vote, on matters like assisted dying or issues around abortion rights.

What they are doing is rejecting the position of the party they were elected under in favour of the position that they believe their faith or church holds.

But politicians are elected not on their religious beliefs but their political beliefs.

And their responsibility in parliament or government is not to promote the principles or beliefs of their religion but to do what is best for their constituents and the country at large.

READ MORE: Severely ill man in TEN YEAR wait to get move from mouldy Glasgow flat

Kate Forbes may well have damaged beyond repair her bid to become SNP leader and First Minister.

If so, she will have done so on the basis of being honest about her views and what she would do on certain issues.

It is better that the SNP membership, who have this decision to take, has this knowledge before they vote for their new leader.

Perhaps others could also be honest and give straightforward answers to direct questions.

If others were open about their religious beliefs, their financial dealings or outside business dealings then we could know more about what motivates them before they get elected.

If the SNP chooses Kate Forbes as their leader, which now seems unlikely, they will do so in the full knowledge that she is not progressive on matters of equality.

She may well have many other attributes that would convince people she is the right choice but her views on gay marriage and having children outside marriage will overshadow them.

And they will know that she will likely bring her faith to bear on decisions she would have to take in Government.

Forbes said she would defend the rights of minorities under legislation already passed as she believes in democracy and the law.

The problem is that as the leader of the biggest party in the country and as First Minister she would be setting the agenda for the coming years and have a huge say in the future direction of the country.

People who find themselves marginalised or even demonised by the teachings of her particular church would rightly be worried that this would influence her decisions.

We live in a country where religious freedom is enshrined in our laws and systems.

While people must be free to practice their religion, the wider society must expect that any religion does not have undue influence on the laws of the land.

There are five political parties represented at the Scottish Parliament.

There are MSPs of several faiths and denominations present.

But they are not elected as  Christian or Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Jewish or any other religious identity.

None of those was on the ballot paper.

Forbes also said she hopes that “others can be afforded the rights of people of faith to practice fairly mainstream teaching”.

According to research, there is now a majority of people who are of ‘no religion’ in Scotland.

Religious freedom is rightly protected in Scotland but is the Scottish Parliament and high political office the right place to practice it?