The impugners of conscientious objection in the case of Ms Ladele were allowed more than 500 words in which to express their illiberal opinions; Mr Davis’ letter contains about 50, and, though well-intentioned, scarcely touches the heart of the matter.

His semi-rhetorical question – ‘Do we want a civil service in which no one is allowed to have religious convictions?’ – all too readily answers itself, but in the wrong way. The anti-religion or anti-conscience people will simply smirk at his naivety, while the other side will calmly reply: ‘Have convictions if you must, so long as you don’t act on them.’ Which is irrefragable (so far as it goes) and is indeed pretty much the reply given by the Court of Appeal, thereby making redundant Mr Davis’ other question: What kind of society are we creating?

Martin Maloney, London N3