Martin Scicluna (‘Amend the Embryo Law’, January 27), is campaigning for the Embryo Protection Act to be amended because he considers a fertilised ovum (embryo) as a soulless living thing, ignoring the fact that he himself was once an embryo.

He resuscitates persuasively contested pro-abortion reasoning. The argument about when the soul enters the body is no longer seriously considered by anyone. Scientifically, all living things have a life force which distinguishes them from dead ones or minerals. If a human fertilised ovum is alive it has a soul from the beginning of its life, and that soul is obviously truly human.

The other argument regarding the time when a developing embryo becomes a person is also defunct in unbiased thinking circles, because being human does not necessarily mean that one has to have a fully developed body, intellect or personality.

Mr Scicluna’s arguments are not scientific or just secular, but are tainted by an obvious anti-Catholic attitude. He cow-tows to secularity and different religions at the expense of the Catholic faith, quoting the paedophile scandals to influence lesser minds against Catholic philosophy.

He should know that it has been shown scientifically that IVF using frozen ova is just as successful as using frozen embryos that cannot or would not be used, and eventually discarded or purposely destroyed.

Throwing away a cell with no future by itself is one thing, but destroying an embryo with an amazing potential of becoming a man or a woman, however early in development, is callous and morally wrong. Therefore, it makes no sense to change the current law that protects the embryo into another that legalises the freezing of embryos in preference to ova.

There is no justification for legally permitting an unnecessary amoral practice that often leads to the immoral act of wasting human lives.