I don’t know who I’m madder at, USA Today or myself.
Last week USA Today editorial writer Louise Branson e-mailed me a request to:
… write a short piece for us about the regulation of fertility clinics in the aftermath of the octuplets scandal, and praising the proposed GA legislation as the standard that should be set nationwide. The piece would need to be around 350 words. It would be an opposing view to our editorial that would warn against the kind of regulation that brings anti-abortion politics into the issue.
“Absolutely,” I responded. With a pro-abortion audience in mind, I wrote a piece explaining the harm of egg harvesting to women, the vast number of human embryos killed throughout the in vitro fertilization process, and how human embryo research proponents use the “leftover” embryos excuse to push their agenda. I closed by describing common sense regulations.
I received this response:
Sorry to be a pain, but could I get you to re-do it a bit…. We were hoping to see a piece that would… say the best way to prevent another Suleman case would be to limit the number of embryos that could be implanted and also define an embryo as a person…. We would be less interested in all the medical details as our debate is on how best to regulate fertility clinics.
I was taken aback. USA Today was telling me how and what to write? I responded…

Continue reading, “How USA Today used me (and I let it),” at WorldNetDaily.com.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...