This is rather stunning. The Hill is reporting that Rep. Jackie Spier is leading the charge for liberals to abandon the Susan G Komen For The Cure charity because it has stopped funding Planned Parenthood. From “House Dem Abandon Susan G. Komen After Planned Parenthood Decision:”
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) on Wednesday morning said she would no longer support the Susan G. Komen Foundation because of that organization’s decision to no longer provide funding to Planned Parenthood. “I have been a big booster of the Susan G. Komen organization,” Speier said on the House floor. “But not anymore.” On Monday, Speier tweeted “Komen’s decision hurts women – it puts politics before women’s health. @komenforthecure should be ashamed.”… Speier closed her remarks by asking women to call the Komen Foundation and tell it to stick to its work fighting cancer. “I ask you to call them, at 1-877-465-6636, and tell them that you want them to stick to what they know,” she said. “Let’s not make this a race to the political bottom.”
But isn’t Speier “hurting women” by leading the charge for others to withhold support for the nation’s most prominent breast cancer charity?
Meanwhile, the Baltimore Sun has editorialized that Komen has somehow struck a blow against abortion. From “Komen’s Attack on Abortion Rights:”
But it also should be noted that Dallas-based Komen last year hired Karen C. Handel as senior vice president of public policy. Ms. Handel, who grew up in Upper Marlboro, served as Georgia secretary of state and ran for governor of that state as a staunchly pro-life candidate who opposed federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
Has Komen adopted an anti-abortion stance, too? Given the obvious political motivations behind the Stearns investigation [in Congress], it’s hard not to see the decision as announcing that. According to Planned Parenthood, Komen is the first private organization to withdraw funding on the grounds of the congressional investigation. One can only assume that this outcome, if it stands, will motivate Congress to pursue all sorts of investigations against all sorts of controversial organizations.
Wow. The editorial speaks of breast health, but the core anger seems to be about abortion.
As I stated in my own post about this event, Komen shouldn’t have funded PP in the first place because–as a general charity–funding the country’s most prominent abortion provider enraged pro lifers who make up about 40% of the country. But now, some supporters of abortion may harm the search for a cure by abandoning Komen. Once Komen strayed into this most intense cultural battlefield, there was no way to keep everyone happy.
The Star Ledger gets that point, but is wrong about the timing. From “Komen Decision to Defund Planned Parenthood Politicizes Breast Cancer Prevention:”
The Komen foundation put its stamp on breast cancer research with its pink ribbon campaign and other events, raising funds and consciousness about the disease. It created a community of women and men with a single goal: to find a cure. Breast cancer strikes everyone, no matter your race, ethnicity or political affiliation. Now that sense of unity has evaporated. People are taking sides. Many who once supported Komen say they’ll take their donations elsewhere and plan to drop out of other Komen activities. It’s hard to see who the winners are in this mess. As so often happens when their bodies become a political battleground, women ultimately lose.
No. Breast cancer was politicized when Komen cut its first check to PP. Now, it is reaping what that original decision sowed.
This is a lesson I learned at Ralph Nader’s knee: If a charity or advocacy cause doesn’t have to enter a battlefield of the culture war, it should stay as far away from the fray as possible. It is foolhardy to cause needless offense when you are seeking broad financial or ideological support. This is a classic case in point.
Update: Howard Dean wants a corporate boycott of Komen to drastically cut its funding until the organization once again funds PP. Yea, that will really help women. Good grief.
Further Update: Komen kissed the abortion ring after all. Here’s my reaction in which I call it a pyrrhic victory for PP.
February 1st, 2012 | 4:09 pm
I will answer the question posed in the headline.
Yes for both far-left liberals and far-right conservatives. It is not exclusive to liberals.
Pro-lifers and religious mythologists care more about abortion than fighting breast cancer; led by Stearns in this case.
Komen claims the separation was a result of the Stearns investigation. Read the release.
It’s sad that a liberal, who should be more rational and data-driven, is falling prey to the same approach of political pressure applied by the republican Stearns. Fortunately, few liberals will follow Speier’s example.
February 1st, 2012 | 5:09 pm
Sometimes I think there is very little that matters more than abortion to some liberals.
But anyway, there are numerous other reasons not to support Susan G. Komen, or at least those pervasive pink ribbon buying campaigns (which go to support them):
http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?page_id=13
holyterror Reply:
February 1st, 2012 at 5:10 pm
@holyterror, … I meant to highlight the part that says that Komen takes money from MANY companies whose products are linked to cancer.
February 1st, 2012 | 6:41 pm
I was a bit shocked (though I don’t know why) by the vitriol that followed the decision and the rush to label Susan G. Komen “anti-choice.” (Although, to be fair, some pro lifers have also gone to an extreme and labled Komen “an arm of Planned Parenthood” for years). It’s ironic-for years pro choicers have been saying of the Susan G. Komen/PP link, “Oh, those mean, mean pro lifers who don’t care about curing breast cancer-abortion is only a tiny portion of what PP does.” Now that Susan G. Komen isn’t funding PP, those some individuals are screaming, “Screw the majority of Susan B. Koimen breast cancer research/prevention that has nothing to do with PP and never did, they defunded PP, those evil anti choice cowards!”
February 1st, 2012 | 7:20 pm
It seems that Susan G Komen For The Cure has acted in a principled pro-choice fashion: it has chosen to give its money elsewhere. There is certainly no lack of organizations legitimately seeking funds to combat breast cancer. SGKFTC will now give it to others instead of Planned Parenthood. If, as all claim, the money given to PP was used to fight breast cancer, then that benefit will continue under different auspices.
In any case, the benefit of screening mammography is, despite the public perception, fairly small. It’s of no proven benefit for women under 50 or over 70, and of real but small benefit for women between those two ages. And to be a complete debunker, even encouraging breast self-examination is not only of unproven benefit, but may even be harmful. (See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12359854)
February 1st, 2012 | 8:11 pm
Access to legal abortion provides liberty to US citizens. A woman then has the choice whether to continue an unwanted pregnancy, incurred by rape or incest or accidentally to a woman who cannot afford another child or to a young girl who is simply too young to start a family.
It is wrong to impose one’s beliefs on all others. That’s not the liberty we seek as Americans. Having access to legal abortion gives us more control over our lives, a woman more control over her body, and let’s each citizen have the option to use this access or not. Just because it’s legal, does not mean you have to use it.
Furthermore, it is clear that the serious decrease in crime experienced in the 1990s stems directly from the advent of legal abortions as a generation of unwanted children were not born and did not grow up to be criminals. Society has benefitted directly from this important effect.
So, everybody. Think seriously about whether you are trying to impose your beliefs on everybody else. It is simply not right or moral to do so.
Victor Reply:
February 1st, 2012 at 9:24 pm
@Charles Higley, Is your comment an example of how to use reverse trip psychology and convince many human beings that “IT” makes a LOT of sense to kill “The Unborn” Charles?
Just asking! :)
Peace
Chris Reply:
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:25 am
@Charles Higley, Abortion is the ultimate imposition of belief on another human being
Barbara C. Reply:
February 2nd, 2012 at 11:07 am
@ Charles Higley “accidentally to a woman”
Pregnancy does not happen “accidentally to a woman” except in the rare cases of rape/incest. I have had two “unplanned pregnancy” but they didn’t happen accidentally. It would be a like a dieter saying “I didn’t lose any weight because I accidentally ate that entire pizza by myself”. In both cases, my sex organs (and my husband’s) did what they were designed to do. It was our choice to use them or not.
It’s funny how people are divorced from the biologic/scientific realities of their own body. The purpose of eating is to provide nutrition for your body; the pleasure is a secondary feature to entice you to eat. The purpose of sex is to create babies; the pleasure is a secondary feature to entice you to have sex and to emotionally bond the participants to provide a stable unit to raise the baby that is made.
“Furthermore, it is clear that the serious decrease in crime experienced in the 1990s stems directly from the advent of legal abortions as a generation of unwanted children were not born and did not grow up to be criminals.”
What about all of the innocent babies that would NOT have grown up to be criminals that have also not been born due to abortion? Do all unplanned pregnancies result in the birth of criminals? (Lord, help me because I’ve already given birth to one criminal and have one on the way.) Is there a way to tell which unwanted (or even planned pregnancy) will result in the birth of a criminal? (Hmmm, must have missed that genetic test in the multitudes of ones I’ve been offered at the obstetrician.)
“So, everybody. Think seriously about whether you are trying to impose your beliefs on everybody else. It is simply not right or moral to do so.”
Do you believe that theft is wrong? Do you believe that murder is wrong? Are things only wrong if they are illegal?
By ten weeks gestation a fetus has the basic structures of every body part (some are small but completely formed such as hand and feet). These body parts will continue to grow and develop for the next 30 weeks in the womb and will not reach maturation until 20 YEARS after birth. These are scientific FACTS not just religious beliefs.
Either it’s a human being in there or not in there (and it’s funny how those who still contend that it is not human being in there all have different ideas of when the fetus “magically becomes one”). The scientific facts seem to support the truth that it is a human being inside who has the same right NOT to be murdered as those out side of the womb.
So, I’d rather “immorally” force my beliefs on others than consent to murder.
Elaine Marlowe Mitchell Reply:
February 2nd, 2012 at 12:53 pm
@Charles Higley, Charles,
To repeat a much used question, “What about the right of the unborn child”.
Whether a child is considered a life at conception or when it takes it’s first breath nobody knows for sure. However, would it not be wise to stay on the side of caution. When in doubt leave it out. Of course there are those that would agree with Peter Singer that a child really isn’t a human until the age of about 3 when they begin to adapt into society.
The argument in 1971 for abortion was for health of the mother, rape and incest however very few abortions are done for those reasons but more like abortions on demand or ooooh it’s a girl or I’ve changed my mind.
And oh is murder also the ultimate imposition of belief on another human being or does that just depend on ones’ belief.
Maura Reply:
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:02 pm
@Charles Higley, I would just like to challenge you to your last question. Are you trying to impose your beliefs on others?
Are pregnant women imposing their beliefs on their children when they abort them? What do you think?
February 1st, 2012 | 9:54 pm
@Charles Higley, Well Higley, abortion does slightly more than give a woman control over her body. It gives her the absolute license to kill her unborn child at any stage of it’s development including viability outside the womb a d completely irrespective of whether or not it’s outlook in life ordains it to a life of crime. In the instant case of Komen it seems Speir and Howard Dean are more than happy to impose their beliefs on others, to wit the Komen trustees, no?
February 1st, 2012 | 10:20 pm
Abortion really shouldn’t have anything to do with this dialogue. PP doesn’t provide mammograms, so why would an organization seeking to promote breast exams give them money?
February 1st, 2012 | 10:28 pm
[...] Continue… 0 [...]
February 1st, 2012 | 11:01 pm
“Speier tweeted ‘Komen’s decision hurts women – it puts politics before women’s health.’”
Helloooooooooooooo, projection.
Maura Reply:
February 2nd, 2012 at 9:06 pm
@bmmg39,
And what I love about this is the irony…it makes scientific/medical sense that abortions and contraceptives GREATLY increase a woman’s chance to have breast cancer. I am not sure if anyone has done a study, but medically it makes sense if there is a link.
February 2nd, 2012 | 8:35 am
Has no one seen how conflicted the Koman organization must have been to read so many medical studies linking abortion, and therefore, Planned Parenthood, to increased risk of breast cancer. Funding Planned Parenthood was diametricly opposed to Komen’s stated goal of curing breast cancer. It seems that Komen has finally gotten serious about reaching its original objective. Bravo!
February 2nd, 2012 | 9:31 am
Monumental PR mistake on Planned Parenthood’s part. Komen was going to let this go quietly, and given the heat and charges PP is facing, you would think they would want to protect the $400+ million in tax dollars they receive and let it go too. Now this is hitting the airwaves widely and PP is being associated with abortion and many people are learning for the first time their favorite charity was giving money to PP. Both losers for PP, doing in a week what took years of education and advertising for us pro-lifers.
February 2nd, 2012 | 10:35 am
The fact that the Sun Editorial counts a defunding of Planned Parenthood as an attack on abortion rights just proves that in the end even the left considers Planned Parenthood’ front of providing “health services” an excuse for the aboriton business. After all supposedly Komen was only supporting PP for it’s breast cancer prevention efforts which obviously the Sun finds ancillary at best.
February 2nd, 2012 | 2:36 pm
“Abortion Matters More Than Fighting Breast Cancer to Liberals?”
Of course it does. They’re really “showing their hand” with their reaction, too.
February 2nd, 2012 | 3:38 pm
Seeing the comments from Speier, Barbara Boxer, and others, it seems that many liberals worship Planned Parenthood as a god, and will attack anyone who does not share their devotion.
February 2nd, 2012 | 4:05 pm
I, for one, as well as many other breast cancer survivors, will stand up & support Susan Komen foundation!
February 2nd, 2012 | 6:18 pm
This article falsley implies that removing money from Komen is the only part of this that restricts treatment when removing money from Planned Parenthood clinics that currently provide screening will also impact treatment. Removing money from Komen and/or Planned Parenthood, in the short term, will remove established access to breast cancer screening. Both sides seem to suggest that they can then donate their money elsewhere to organizations that provide greater benefit to women’s health. So if the right does not see a problem with removing the funding from Planned Parenthood and transfering it to other breast cancer fighting organizations, what is the difference between that and similarly removing the funding from Komen and directing it to other organizations that benefit women’s health?
February 2nd, 2012 | 7:12 pm
It wasn’t the abolitionists that were, by and large, violent. It was when the candy of slavery was restricted that caused the disunion. Likewise, the prolifers who have been, by and large, marching and protesting peacefully for a few decades do not make the news. Will it be peaceful when the candy is taken away from the abortionists? They are violent enough to pull apart arms and legs every day, and will become more violent when their cotton-pickin’ industry is restricted further.
February 2nd, 2012 | 9:20 pm
[...] left is in a rage, because abortion matters more to them than fighting breast cancer. Howard Dean and other leftists are encouraging corporate [...]
February 2nd, 2012 | 10:00 pm
I can’t say I’ve read every article written since Komen announced their decision but, I find it interesting that I have seen zero mention of the link between abortion and breast cancer. Regardless of your belief regarding the right or wrong of abortion, if you are an organization that seeks to cure cancer, specifically breast cancer, then it seem counter-productive and counter-intuitive to fund any organization that performs abortions, which greatly increase a woman’s risk of getting breast cancer.
February 2nd, 2012 | 10:23 pm
Yes. Next question?
February 2nd, 2012 | 10:49 pm
I did not support the Komen foundation before. But now I wholeheartedly do. All citizens standing for truth must support this foundation that truly stands for women and families.
February 2nd, 2012 | 11:17 pm
I’m so glad that Komen did what it did. I hope people will thank them. For those kind of calls or e-mails surely are welcome in the face of the anger and threats by Planned Parenthood advocates. I sincerely feel that abortion advocates are doing what they sincerely feel is right. We can pray for these same Planned Parenthood advocates, and all of us, to see the Truth of God’s great love for His own image and likeness, us. We were not made to quietly go along with abortions, it hurts us because it is not in our Divine nature. It is in our nature to love, and heal, and share, and give… That’s what makes people happy. Women who’ve had abortions and regretted them, are proving this everyday…and bless them!
February 3rd, 2012 | 1:49 am
Access to legal abortion provides liberty to US citizens.
The “right” to choose whether or not another human being is or is not human is more than just ‘liberty’.
Besides, those babies that are killed are US citizens too. We aren’t all born equal, we are created equal.
If you lived by the Golden Rule – instead of finding ways to justify ignoring it – you’d understand what’s wrong with depriving other humans of life. Especially when there’s so much life left in front of them that is being taken.
And especially for such trivial reasons.
HistoryWriter Reply:
February 3rd, 2012 at 10:50 am
@Blake,
Ummm, those fetuses (not babies) that were aborted were NOT American citizens. Citizenship can be claimed only by those who are either born or naturalized. Please see the 14th Amendment. Last time I checked it was still in force.
HW
February 3rd, 2012 | 5:27 am
Why not continue to fund Planned Parenthood, but stipulate that any funds must not go toward abortions, but only for fighting breast cancer, and other illnesses? Perhaps it could be turned into an organization that fights diseases, instead of one that provides abortions?
I would add that, just because PP does some wrong things, like provide abortions, doesn’t mean that other things it does are wrong.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 3rd, 2012 at 10:37 am
Money is fungible, Bret.
Bret Lythgoe Reply:
February 4th, 2012 at 5:26 am
@Wesley J. Smith, Thanks, that’s a good point. I have no problem, and consider it a very good thing, to have an organization that fights breast cancer, other forms of cancer, sexually transmitted diseases, as long as it doesn’t provide abortions. Sadly, though, Planned Parenthood does provide the latter, which is why I could never support it.
February 3rd, 2012 | 8:56 am
[...] childish as Planned Parenthood is acting, I think Wesley Smith is right. Komen is just reaping what they sowed when they chose to partner with PP in the first place. Lucky [...]
February 3rd, 2012 | 10:16 am
[...] follow suit? That’s why, no matter how many women’s lives are saved by their actions, they must be destroyed. The Hill is reporting that Rep. Jackie Spier is leading the charge for liberals to abandon the [...]
February 3rd, 2012 | 10:45 am
I was delighted to learn that New York Mayor Bloomberg has personally given $250,000 to Planned Parenthood to help offset the loss of Komen funds. Equally good to hear was that both my daughters, who have been regular donors to Komen, will be making their donations directly to Planned Parenthood instead — as will my wife and I.
I hope more people will follow their example.
HW
February 3rd, 2012 | 11:55 am
It looks like Komen is backing off a bit, and now unfortunately caving to PP supporters:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2012/02/03/us/politics/03reuters-usa-healthcare-komen.html?hp
February 3rd, 2012 | 2:23 pm
HistoryWriter: “Citizenship can be claimed only by those who are either born or naturalized. Please see the 14th Amendment.”
No, that isn’t what the 14th Amendment says, at all. Do you not remember all the times in the past when I’ve had to correct you on this? All of those born or naturalized in the United States are citizens. The amendment makes no mention, yea or nay, of unborn persons. Every resident of Milwaukee is a resident of Wisconsin. If what you were saying were true, then that would mean that every resident of Wisconsin is a resident of Milwaukee. But, as any student of logic will tell you, the converse and the inverse of a true statement are not necessarily true, themselves.
HistoryWriter Reply:
February 4th, 2012 at 7:44 am
@bmmg39,
In this case the end result is the same. Federal law does not recognize fetuses as “persons” or as “citizens” until they’re born.
Sorry, but the only way that’s going to change is by revising the 14th Amendment.
Are you saying that conservatives have abandoned strict construction in favor of the “unwritten” … such as marital privacy and abortion rights?
HW
February 3rd, 2012 | 5:21 pm
[...] down? NewsBusters. Maddow. Reaping a delayed harvest? Secondhand Smoke. Finessing? Jill Stanek. Share [...]
February 4th, 2012 | 5:24 am
I was delighted to learn that New York Mayor Bloomberg has personally given $250,000 to Planned Parenthood to help offset the loss of Komen funds.
I was, too.
It sure helps our cause when you guys contradict your own narratives.
(It also helps that there are so many people who don’t even understand what I mean when I say that.)
February 4th, 2012 | 5:50 pm
HistoryWriter: “In this case the end result is the same.”
No, it isn’t, for the explanation I’ve already provided.
HistoryWriter Reply:
February 7th, 2012 at 1:35 pm
@bmmg39,
Citizens are either “born” or “naturalized.” What part of the 14th Amendment don’t you understand?
HW
February 6th, 2012 | 8:23 am
I would add that, just because PP does some wrong things, like provide abortions, doesn’t mean that other things it does are wrong.
The problem in this case is that, by giving money to Planned Parenthood, they’re not giving it to providers who actually offer mammograms.
Breast cancer stuff is not what Planned Parenthood does. Its primary focus has always been on issues revolving around reproduction.
It’s good that PP does refer women, but it does not do mammograms itself – and that ought to be the single biggest issue when it comes to treating breast cancer, because early detection is *THE* best way to combat cancer.
Getting cancerous material removed before it spreads is far, far better than any other treatment.
February 9th, 2012 | 1:56 am
HistoryWriter: “Citizens are either ‘born’ or ‘naturalized.’ What part of the 14th Amendment don’t you understand?”
I understand the amendment in its entirety. You fail to grasp the logical error you have repeatedly made.
“All of those who are born or naturalized are citzens.”
is not the same as
“All citizens must have been born or naturalized.”
for the same reason that
“All U.S. presidents up through 2012 have been men.”
is not the same as
“All men up through 2012 have been U.S. presidents.”
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
February 9th, 2012 at 10:36 am
When you understand the Bill of Rights then you can lecture others on the Constitution.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact