Abortion wars at UCSD

Dogs are NOT outlawed in PB

UCSD medical school. “We understand this is a very early stage.”
  • UCSD medical school. “We understand this is a very early stage.”

Fallaciously balanced

ARE YOU KIDDING??? I know you’re not a first-line journalistic organization, but how on earth could you consider publishing anything whose main source is The Center for Medical Progress (“UCSD researchers use organs from aborted babies,” Neighborhood News, June 5)? They are NOT an ethics and watchdog group, they are an anti-choice lobbying group that is also the group responsible for the infamous fake abortion videos in 2015. You really need to publish a clarification, stating that your “journalist” was merely regurgitating info received from a nefarious organization, and that this “story” is not really a story at all. And if I’m wrong in thinking that this was a mistake, and that you are engaged in the fallacious concept of “balance”, please let me know so I can stop looking at the Reader for good.

  • LS Ferro
  • Hillcrest

Earlier emails from UCSD Reproductive Medicine and Scripps: “On Friday I’m going to [Planned Parenthood] and will collect liver tissue.”

Earlier emails from UCSD Reproductive Medicine and Scripps: “On Friday I’m going to [Planned Parenthood] and will collect liver tissue.”

Abortion insights

We want to thank you for publishing the insightful article, by Eric Bartl, in the June 6, 2019 edition of the San Diego Reader:UCSD researchers use organs from aborted babies”. By reminding us of the work of The Center for Medical Progress in exposing the unethical practices of Planned Parenthood and UCSD researchers, your paper has done a great public service. Let’s put a stop to the practice of researchers buying and using human fetus cells, tissues and organs for research, which is against California state law.

  • The Eyer Family
  • Carlsbad

“Do I get to wear an orange jumpsuit?" asks Steve.

“Do I get to wear an orange jumpsuit?" asks Steve.

Beach Area Community Court website

P.B. doggy tales

Part of the problem is the owner, not the dog (“Pacific Beach sends dog owners to re-education camp,” Neighborhood News, June 3). Sidewalks and park areas are plainly marked with signs, such as the one in the article. The hours of use are clear. Play by the rules and you don’t get a ticket. Ignore the rules and you DESERVE your ticket. Then along comes the single dog owner who feels, “This is MY dog, and MY dog is special. If MY dog poops it’s only one dog and that’s no problem.” It isn’t a problem for the dog owner; it IS a problem for the walker or jogger who doesn’t see the land mine or torpedo on the sidewalk or in the grass. Dog poop sticks well to the cracks and crevices in tennis shoes, and it stinks. As for a place to play or exercise your dog: go to Fiesta Island. Four hundred acres of island are leash free. If you really want to go Born Free, then go inside the 90 acres of fenced dog area and turn your dog loose. No one will bother you unless your dog decides to growl or bite. Then you need to reeducate your dog, and you need to be aware of the safety of others. Dogs are NOT outlawed in PB. Just play by the rules.

  • Anthony Mournian
  • Bay Park

Share / Tools

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • AddThis
  • Email

More from SDReader


LS thanks for sharing what's on your mind. But where in the article is a regurgitation of anything from CMP, much less anything depicting them as a primary source? In fact, they did not even respond to provide comment. The basis of the story are the emails CMP published from UCSD. UCSD verified their legitimacy. They were not fabricated. Those are facts. UCSD is more of a source in this story than CMP, as are the ethicists from USD and Georgetown, who provide differing opinions. Tell me how this story can be more balanced and I'll try harder in the future. As to the CMP videos, sounds like you are advocating censoring the relevant and important information contained in them. That's not what balanced journalism does. What makes you think the CMP videos are "fake?" I looked into the accusations that the videos are deceptively edited. On the surface there is no sign that words were taken from different statements and spliced together to forge fabricated statements. It's obvious Planned Parenthood officials actually made the statements they are in the videos making. Those videos have been the basis for investigations which led to state action to defund Planned Parenthood in Texas for misconduct and the successful prosecution in Orange County. The fifth circuit court of appeals upheld the videos as credible evidence. The only evidence I could find that the statements in the videos were not actually made is that Planned Parenthood said so. Eyer family: thanks for the note

Log in to comment

Skip Ad

Let’s Be Friends

Subscribe for local event alerts, concerts tickets, promotions and more from the San Diego Reader