I think the main point behind the anti-using human embryos for research/abortion etc is potential. They don't, in that state, have feelings, thoughts, moral judgement - all the things that we value in a human life - but they have the potential to have these things, to be very like you or me.

Anna, Oxford,

There is no need to be Christian (or religious at all) to think that there is something special about human life. If one accepts that specialness, it is legitimate to ask when it begins. I consider abortion for "social reasons" at 23 weeks to be an outrage - and I am an athiest.

Nick, Rotherham, UK

As someone with"afflictions" which today might give rise to considerations of abortion, I say to those who push for such "please put your selfish feelings aside" Your major concern is with your own self image. I enjoy life, yes with its ups and downs and do not fear the end of life.

Keith Birch, Hamilton, Canada

Is or is not male sperm an embryo with a soul? If it is all of us males are mass murderers on a far greater scale than than has ever been conceived of.
It is only a matter of opinion that claims that a baby has a soul. I believe that a soul slowly developes as the child matures. Some never mature.

John D, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

If my Mother had aborted her third child she would have killed me. No ifs no buts.Statement of fact. Your intemperate lagauage does you no credit.
Phil. Anglesey

Phil Pinnington, Pentraeth, U.K.

Yet another example of atheists attacking straw men. Christianity does not teach "eternal souls" (a Greek concept)but bodily resurrection and the sanctity of human life in its physicality. What is clear is that atheism leaves us absolutely defenceless in the face of the culture of death.

MJS, Basel, Switzerland

Other countries have no such qualms when it comes to embryo or equivalent research. Are we then entitled to derive benefits from their research in future? If we do, are we then not being hypocritical now?

Ian cheese, london, uk

nothing in "moral philosophy" says that anything with a body has a soul. If this were so then any plant would also have a soul. But this is the problem with a "soul", this is a religious idea with no evidence to support it. But it is being used to hamper medical development.

P Stokes, Nuneaton, UK

One wonders why Mr. Syed feels the need to resort to strawman arguments (ignoring the moral issue of experimenting on what is, at least in potential, an undeveloped form of human life) while exaggerating the imminence of any benefits. Does he honestly demand no ethical limits on research at all?

David Richards, London, United Kingdom

It's important that we have a moral debate on this topic, but Christians should not be given a louder voice than anyone else. In fact it would be better if they were ignored entirely. Ethics and morals can be debated perfectly well without this particular minority, misguided,special-interest group.

Jack, Stevenage, UK

I'm sorry, but how on earth can you equate miscarriage with abortion? To do so is to insult every couple who have ever known the heartbreak of trying for and then losing a child.

That argument is ill-thought-out and hurtful. Unimpressive, Matthew.

Clare, Manchester,

Gee, given humanity's long and successful track-record in respecting the dignity of others and protecting the vulnerable, I agree with Mr Syed that we can breezily dispense with any doubts or qualms about using embryos. Silly people who believe in the soul, or at least worry a bit... Let's go!

Terence McEneny, Novi Sad, Serbia

I'm not a christian (or other faith), but your argument is illogical nonsense. if the intent is to create life, mere failure does not equate to murder.

and, john, it's not a choice between the mother's life and her child's, but merely the mother's convenience.

jem, london, uk

Just another sad example of how other people's religious beliefs interfere with the chance for real, tangible, 21st century progress. Research that will result in new treatments for deadly diseases that kill millions is pushed back and we ALL suffer for longer because of evangelical finger-wagging

Spike, Liverpool,

It is easy to refute the religious conservatives restrictions on science for the sake of the soul - make them demonstrate the existence of the soul in the first place. They cannot. How satisfying to read a Times column that expresses the moral truth of this matter so sternly, at last.

Liam, Stoke, UK

Natural miscarriages are akin to natural deaths, of which there are about 600,000 in Britain every year. They are not murder, unless arsenic is found in the body, or a knife in the back.

Dave, Wrexham,

I should think it's quite difficult to justify a position here.
The current state of Biology in no way suggests that an Embryo is not human.
So how anyone could anyone justify abortion. Let alone Experimentation. When the mother is in danger the area is blurred. But this is very rare.

Jonathan Pelham, Bristol, United Kingdom

A.Monette, Montreal, where on earth have you found Christian teaching that says animals have souls? You most certainly have a unique version of the Bible if it says that anywhere!

M.Robinson, London, UK

I don't see the logic of your first paragraph. After all, every embryo which goes on to be born will also eventually die.

Peter Taylor, Valencia, Spain

I am an atheist but I object to abortion and experimentation on embryos. Either something is alive or it is not. If it is alive, it is wrong to kill it or experiment on it. How is an embryo not alive? Moreover, Syed's argument is rubbish - we are not saving living children but hypopthetical children

Tim, London,

A set of blue prints is nothing before the building is built which in this case is when the baby is born. Before that it is not a person. Do these people want to send women back to the dark ages. Whose life is more important, that of the woman or the unborn child? Woman every time.

John, Egremont,

Religious people do not have a monopoly on morals or conscience.
My moral feeling is that it is abhorrent to seek to impose one's beliefs on other people.
Everybody is responsible for their own actions. Only I am responsible for mine. The Christinas should look to the motes in their own eyes!

Rosemary, Germany,

Well, according to moral philosophy, anything that has a body also as a soul, including embryos and animals (cf mind-body problem). Animal embryos are obviously less important than human ones, but church teaching holds that they too have souls. The integrity of the body is held in very high value.

A Monette, Montreal,