Twenty-five days to go and an invisible fault line is running the length of Scotland that could leave its mark on the country for generations, no matter what happens when the nation votes on independence on 18 September. In every place where people gather the question is being asked with increasing urgency: "Are you a yes or a no?"  What will often follow is a heated discussion on currency union, Europe, the NHS and North Sea oil reserves. Occasionally so heated that some fear the deep emotion and passion being invested in the independence campaign, especially by the yes side, could leave the country psychologically scarred.  The moderator of the general assembly of the Church of Scotland has made plans to hold a service of reconciliation in the days following the referendum, as he is concerned about the nature of the divisions that the campaign has uncovered. The writer Alexander McCall Smith has also expressed his sadness that Scotland "is now a divided country".  But the nation's leading thinker and academic, Professor Tom Devine, disagreed. "What I see in families and in pubs and in the public debates that I've attended is serious, sometimes fierce, sometimes very strong, engagement," Devine said. "But I simply don't see any evidence that the political division has caused the kind of societal division that McCall Smith talks about."  It is certainly true that in families where politics had never before featured significantly in conversations, dinner-times have just become that bit more interesting. Very often, siblings and work colleagues with little otherwise to say to each other are engaging again over the fiscal deficit or public sector funding.  The rebirth of proper, old-fashioned, tub-thumping politics has occurred all over Scotland during the independence campaign and things may never be the same again, no matter what the outcome.  The family of this writer is itself divided over the issue. Clare, my oldest daughter, is as passionate a yes campaigner as there is, while her brother, Brendan, wastes no opportunity to tell you why it's OK to be in the UK and that the nationalist sums don't add up.  Here, they and two other families who are divided on the issue explain why they have agreed to disagree.  I am no, principally because I simply don't think the Scottish nationalists have – in the slightest – thought this through or costed it properly. One of my major objections is that their campaign seems to be based on emotion rather than rationality.  I'm also puzzled why I'm being asked to vote on such an important issue when there will be so many imponderables even after a yes vote. Both sides would be negotiating for a year and a half after a yes vote, which means there would be all sorts of horse-trading. So, basically, things that people understood they were voting for could be bartered away. This is putting the cart before the horse. This would be a far more transparent vote if the negotiations were agreed before the vote.  I also resent being accused of being less than patriotic if I choose to vote no on 18 September. Many of us who will be voting no simply feel that we have responsibilities, in terms of putting food on the table for our families and paying our bills. We would all like to be romantic about this, but there are some harsh realities about separation that I don't think the the nationalists have addressed.  And yes voters also seem wedded to a narrative that we are all being raped and pillaged by the English, but that's simply nonsense. If it wasn't for many English families who have chosen to live here, our highland economy wouldn't be what it is.  I'm voting yes because of many things. I think the nationalists, while they've been in power, have delivered things that show they can govern properly. I like the fact that I live in a country that can deliver free prescriptions and university education for its children and has managed to stick to the budget, as John Swinney has.  The no side say they will give us fresh tax-raising powers, although they are unspecified, but if they are to be believed we will get that anyway, whether it's yes or no. I just want Scotland to have responsibility for using them properly and our spending priorities of the last few years tell me that they will. I also believe we bring in more money than we spend.  I have to confess, though, that until the referendum campaign I was very apolitical, whereas all the rest of my family – my mum and dad and my two sisters – were all more politically engaged than I and are all against independence.  Most politicians are selfish, I think, and purely in it for themselves, but I think the SNP are different and want to look after ordinary people. We have a chance here to throw out all the debris of Westminster; the large, corrupt and cumbersome government that does not represent the ordinary people in the street.  I'm proud to be British and Scottish. Independence is a nice, romantic idea and carries an emotional appeal.  The logical case for independence, however, is far too flawed to take seriously. The yes campaign has been built almost entirely on our oil and gas and renewables industry, based on information that seems to be incorrect; just ask [oil services executive] Sir Ian Wood … That's not to say that an independent Scotland would rely solely on these resources, but it does lead me to question just what else has been over-exaggerated in this campaign. I'm proud of our Scottish history, but also the history we share with the rest of the UK.  Also, I don't think Alex Salmond has a mandate to call this referendum at this time. His government was elected on a small turnout of less than 60% of the electorate, and so a small, unrepresentative group of ardent separatists have driven the rest of the country into a campaign they didn't seek. They've taken advantage of Tory austerity measures to fly their kite.  However, I've been encouraged by the way that many Scots who weren't previously engaged in politics, like my sister Clare, are now fully involved and participating in the debate. And when we vote to remain in the UK, I hope that they will all accept the result and work with our English brothers and sisters to bring about a more equitable society for all.  I never used to be very interested in politics, as I thought that most of our politicians were just in it for themselves. Then, when I began to study social work, I began to see the negative impact of London's policies on very many poor and vulnerable people.  I just see independence for Scotland as an opportunity to reject the neo-liberalism at the heart of Westminster politics. This is all about protecting the interests of a tiny political elite and their wealthy supporters.  You can see that in the way that the coalition government, aided and abetted by the so-called Labour party, have punished poor people and disabled people in their austerity drive.  I have seen the pain and suffering that the Westminster government has caused to vulnerable families in Scotland. And now we have been given this fantastic opportunity to reject the greed, corruption and self-interest of Westminster rule and to create a new politics in Scotland.  I'm not saying everything will suddenly be great, only that we will have the chance to build something that is better.  I am also voting yes on 18 September because I have a fear that – if the country votes no – we will be the laughing stock of the whole world. "You had a chance of shaping your own destiny and making your own decisions," they will say, "and you were too afraid to take the final step. Why should we take you seriously?"  I'm voting yes because I just can't see why we can't stand on our own feet like many other countries of the same size can. I remember not that long ago, when Rosemary and I were down in London, and we'd just got to Marylebone station, and we started listening to a tour guide who was nearby, talking to some overseas visitors.  He was telling them where to visit, and then one of the visitors asked him about Glasgow and he said: "You don't want to go there, it's a horrible, nasty place." So Rosemary and I couldn't help ourselves, we had to intervene. "Excuse me," says Rosemary, "that's just wrong. We're from Glasgow and it's a fantastic city. Don't listen to him." And I asked him, "Have you ever been to Glasgow?" Of course he hadn't, but at least he apologised and then asked if we had a whisky trail.  I hear people talking about our pensions and asking if they'll be safe, but many people leave the UK and retire to live in a foreign country and they still get their pensions all right. And I was shocked by the news that the UK government wants to spend £13bn on Trident over the next 10 years. Scotland's share of that will be £1bn – just to keep a nuclear submarine in our waters. That's immoral.  I'm probably a bit of a half-hearted no voter. I'd not really thought about it very much one way or another, but then I saw the TV debate the other week and I didn't think the first minister did very well. I felt there were many questions left unanswered to do with the pound and how we will cost things. In fact, I'm not even sure the nationalists have the answer to them at all.  And I, too, am a very patriotic Scot. When we met that rude tour guide in London I was really angry. I'm normally quite shy, but I walked up to him and said: "Excuse me, you don't know what you're talking about."  And after the death of Margaret Thatcher we were in London again and we went to mass on the Sunday. And the priest wouldn't stop going on about her and praising her. So I went up to him after mass and said, "Father, that woman tried to destroy Scotland, and anyway I'm here to pray and hear the word of God, not the word of Margaret Thatcher."  So I'm as patriotic as anyone, but I just feel that there are some risks that the Scottish nationalists just have not properly addressed yet, and they affect many ordinary people and perhaps young people who are starting a family and are thinking about what the future holds.
The result is still unclear, but the campaign has provoked huge political debate – and divided even the nation's families. Here we profile three whose members are split by the referendum