Human-animal hybrid research is important
It is somewhat misleading for your article to state that "ethics groups" support a ban on creating animal-human hybrid embryos. Some ethics groups might indeed support a ban on research to create animal-human hybrid embryos (Ban on hybrid embryos threat to science, April 5). But they do not have a monopoly on the ethical perspective, as is made clear by the comments of Dr Calum MacKellar.
First, it is far from clear that "millions" of British citizens are "deeply offended" at the prospect of the use of such embryos. Secondly, if they are offended, it is quite possibly because they mistakenly believe that actual animals will be created, which is not the case. And, thirdly, it is simply not an ethical argument to claim that something that gives offence is immoral. In some countries, women who speak without being spoken to are regarded as offensive, yet we do not regard them as unethical.
Those who object to this research on the grounds that it is wrong to create creatures that are genetic chimeras can have no complaint, as the embryos will be destroyed before they are 14 days old. Equally, those who object because it involves the creation and destruction of embryos can have no objection to this specific type of research, as the destruction of embryos is already permitted under British law. The Science and Technology Select Committee is quite right to support this important research. - Dr David Shaw, Centre for Ethics, Philosophy and Public Affairs, University of St Andrews.
ID scaremongering'
Geraint Bevan's scaremongering comments about identity cards are simply wrong. The Identity Cards Act strictly prohibits details such as your medical records or salary details being stored on the National Identity Register. In fact, only basic personal information necessary for identification purposes can be held. In addition, only vetted civil servants will have access to the register and not private companies as Mr Bevan states. Private organisations will only be able to request confirmation of an individual's identity and then only with that individual's consent.
Domestic violence is a horrific and cowardly crime that this government is committed to tackling. Mr Bevan's statements are completely without merit and he would be advised to check his facts in the future.
Misinformed statements such as these can cause real distress for victims of this abuse.
A national identity scheme, underpinned by our unique biometric data, will provide a vital tool for law enforcement officials frustrating criminals who depend on multiple, false and stolen identities to operate. - Joan Ryan MP, Home Office Minister, 2 Marsham Street, London.
Cost of words
In response to Dr Thomson's letter (April 4), it is with pleasure and very happy memories I say the word "antidisestablishmentarianism".
It was worth 3d (three old pence) to me in 1955, being the prize offered by my teacher at the Murray Primary School, East Kilbride, for the first pupil in class to spell the word correctly. As I recall, neither "numpty" nor "serendipity" figured in the language then, although I have to confess I like both of them. - Douglas Corner, 6 Wellknowe Road, Thorntonhall.
French train success
To take James Clark's point on the TGV one step further (April 5), will someone also please explain how it is that the French can achieve this record-breaking feat within a state-owned railway system? It says a lot about the privatisation ideology, doesn't it? - Alastair Naughton, Burnside House, Burnside Road, Peterculter, Aberdeen.
Holy Week forgotten
I have scanned The Herald this week for a single mention of this, Holy Week - alas, an event long forgotten in secular Scotland. However I was delighted to read that the Iranian President (a Muslim) was more aware of the most significant event in all history.
The Churches in Scotland should get off their knees (after prayer) and stand up - perhaps they could even shout from the rooftops "Sunday is Resurrection Day". - Dr F Donald Tosh, 170 Crow Road, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article