For religious folks this dilemma is easy: a material body needs a "spirit" to be alive (this is what is mainly responsible for consciousness and the ability to experience qualia), and automations have no spirit, therefore they are not (and can never be) alive.
For the non-religious I can see the dilemma. Human minds are just biological computers and nothing more, so there's a point at which electric computers will match or exceed the biological ones.
At any rate, both the religious and non religious are forced to assume consciousness is some form of magic or another beyond human control. There's no way to prove that anything or anyone is conscious beyond yourself.
Is it really that easy for religious folks to dismiss though?
If someone believes consciousness arises from a non-physical spirit through an unknown mechanism; then it seems difficult to argue that this can only happen in the specific arrangements of biological cells that we've seen on earth and not in other ways.
E.g. Donald Hoffman's view around consciousness being fundamental certainly wouldn't preclude a machine operating as a portal* in the same way humans do.
*I'm only familiar with his ideas and the concept of 'portals' from his recent appearance on the Lex Fridman and TOE podcasts.
For the non-religious I can see the dilemma. Human minds are just biological computers and nothing more, so there's a point at which electric computers will match or exceed the biological ones.
At any rate, both the religious and non religious are forced to assume consciousness is some form of magic or another beyond human control. There's no way to prove that anything or anyone is conscious beyond yourself.