Komen Reverses Decision On Funding PP

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

nota bene said:
I don't really see how manual breast exams and referrals for mammograms makes PP a significant contributor to women's breast health or the fight against breast cancer. Wouldn't that same money be better spent on county health units and organizations that do provide free and/or low-cost mammograms?

Planned Parenthood is known for it's countrywide access to low income women. It holds a unique place in that regard. It's access as a single organization to so many people throughout the country makes it, I think, a smart option for funding since other organizations will have a more limited reach even if they can provide mammograms on their own.

emdash said:
It is true that no link has been proven to exist between abortion and breast cancer. However, the National Cancer Institute states that oral contraceptives have been shown to increase the risk of liver, cervical and yes, breast cancer, and Planned Parenthood is proud to be a leading provider of free or affordable birth control. Therefore it is not totally unreasonable to suggest that funding PP is not in keeping with Komen's mission.

The American Cancer Society states that full term pregnancies resulting in childbirth lead to an increased risk of breast cancer and hospitals all over the country are proud of delivering babies. Therefore, it is not totally unreasonable to suggest that funding places that provide abortions is in keeping with Komen's mission.

1Perry · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Planned Parenthood even states that all they do is a referral service. It costs nothing to refer someone to somewhere else. The money would be far better spent at the places that actually perform mammograms and such.

Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses teach patients about breast care, connect patients to resources to help them get vital biopsies, ultrasounds, and mammograms, and follow up to make sure patients are cared for with the attention they need and deserve.

That makes it sound so swell but all they do is make recommendations.

Breast Cancer Screenings - Options

emdash · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

ThePlayDrive said:
The American Cancer Society states that full term pregnancies resulting in childbirth lead to an increased risk of breast cancer and hospitals all over the country are proud of delivering babies. Therefore, it is not totally unreasonable to suggest that funding places that provide abortions is in keeping with Komen's mission.

In reality, American Cancer Society's website states that women who have had no children have a slightly higher breast cancer risk, while having many pregnancies or becoming pregnant at a young age reduces breast cancer risk.

Harshaw · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

ThePlayDrive said:
Therefore, it is not totally unreasonable to suggest that funding places that provide abortions is in keeping with Komen's mission.

Sure, only about 99% unreasonable. I do hope I don't have to explain why.

Temporal · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

I don't think cancer societies are really helping us fight cancer - they're just money monsters. That said, I'm glad the PP decision was overturned. They provide way more services to families than just abortion, including pre-natal care and checkups.

I've always donated to PP but it's good to know they are regaining part of their funding stream again. The service they provide to America is essential.

emdash · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Temporal said:
They provide way more services to families than just abortion, including pre-natal care and checkups.

Don't underestimate the ratio of abortions to prenatal care; this pie chart is from 2008.

Also of note, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood increases yearly by leaps and bounds, while the number of adoption referrals and prenatal visits dwindles. In 2007 the ratio of adoption referrals to abortions was a staggering 1 to 62. The 2008 ratio was 1 adoption for every 134 abortions, and the 2009 ratio was 1:340.

The 2010 ratio was 1 adoption referral for every 391 abortions.

Make your own conclusions, but I would prefer not to see Komen money spent on clinics that refer women elsewhere for breast exams while making abortion, an issue unrelated to Susan G. Komen, such a priority; cutting out the middle man--Planned Parenthood--would make each Komen dollar go much further in the battle against breast cancer. I would even go so far as to say that it would be more appropriate for Komen money to go to places that do not provide free or affordable oral contraceptives to teenagers and adults until the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer has been addressed.

I was disappointed by the un-de-funding this week, a move that seemed even more political to me than the decision to defund in the first place.

lizzie · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Sounds like some political arm-twisting to me.

DiAnna · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Threads like this always make me incredibly said, as misinformation and carefully-edited for inacuracy information is thrown around with the "A" word. It has completely ignored women's health in an almost rabid attempt to enforce a political agenda on an agency that spends 97% of its resources on non-abortion related women's health issues, and offers low-to-no cost health care to women who frequently have no other place to go.

People are entitled to their personal views about abortion, but when it spreads into attempts to remove an extremely valuable asset to low and moderate income women's health care, it really kinda ticks me off. This whole thing was a political move, created by another political move by a conservative congressman, who also wishes to close down PP's 97% of non-abortion related health care to legislate his personal views, and force them on the entire country. Shame on him, and shame on the Komen Foundation.

Renae · Feb 4, 2012

But not if you’re a liberal enforcer. Senator Barbara Boxer, with characteristic understatement, compared the Komen Foundation’s Nancy Brinker to Joe McCarthy: “I’m reminded of the McCarthy era, where somebody said: ‘Oh,’ a congressman stands up, a senator, ‘I’m investigating this organization and therefore people should stop funding them.’” But Komen is not a congressman or a senator or any other part of the government, only a private organization. And therefore it is free to give its money to whomever it wishes, isn’t it?

The Liberal Enforcers - Mark Steyn - National Review Online

I think that whole piece sums it up. PP doesn't do mammograms, but you cannot stop giving them grant to support mammograms because that hurts the Pro-death cause.

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

MrVicchio said:
The Liberal Enforcers - Mark Steyn - National Review Online

I think that whole piece sums it up. PP doesn't do mammograms, but you cannot stop giving them grant to support mammograms because that hurts the Pro-death cause.

No. Arguments in favor of PP aren't about mammograms, they are about breast exams - PP performs hundreds of thousands a year - particularly as they pertain to low income women. People's support of PP in this situation isn't some hidden agenda to support abortion. A lot of people really believe that PP is an important part of encouraging breast health in low income women. It's not a conspiracy to fund abortion and pro-choicers are not "pro-death" and I don't know why you want represent yourself by making such petty remarks.

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

1Perry said:
Planned Parenthood even states that all they do is a referral service. It costs nothing to refer someone to somewhere else. The money would be far better spent at the places that actually perform mammograms and such.

Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses teach patients about breast care, connect patients to resources to help them get vital biopsies, ultrasounds, and mammograms, and follow up to make sure patients are cared for with the attention they need and deserve.

That makes it sound so swell but all they do is make recommendations.

Breast Cancer Screenings - Options

They do breast exams and referrals for mammograms. I don't know why you say, "PP even says...", since it's well known. But their access to low income women countrywide makes them a smart organization to donate to since they guarantee that they'll reach huge numbers of women (most low-income) on their own.

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

emdash said:
In reality, American Cancer Society's website states that women who have had no children have a slightly higher breast cancer risk, while having many pregnancies or becoming pregnant at a young age reduces breast cancer risk.

It doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is that everything is linked to some disease so to say, "this might cause this so we shouldn't donate to this" is ridiculous in my opinion.

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Harshaw said:
Sure, only about 99% unreasonable. I do hope I don't have to explain why.

My response was sarcastic, so no, you don't.

Renae · Feb 4, 2012

ThePlayDrive said:
No. Arguments in favor of PP aren't about mammograms, they are about breast exams - PP performs hundreds of thousands a year - particularly as they pertain to low income women. People's support of PP in this situation isn't some hidden agenda to support abortion. A lot of people really believe that PP is an important part of encouraging breast health in low income women. It's not a conspiracy to fund abortion and pro-choicers are not "pro-death" and I don't know why you want represent yourself by making such petty remarks.

Obviously they didn't do THAT much or Komen wouldn't have dropped the grant in the first place. Your little heart string story of PP being a bastion of Health for poor women is such BS it's sickening.

ThePlayDrive · Feb 4, 2012

MrVicchio said:
Obviously they didn't do THAT much or Komen wouldn't have dropped the grant in the first place. Your little heart string story of PP being a bastion of Health for poor women is such BS it's sickening.

It's not a heartstring story so much as an explanation that what your perceive as 'fake' is not. If you want to counter people's actual beliefs about PP, go ahead, but your accusations that people are just lying to support abortion and your petty name-calling (pro-death) adds nothing. And again, I don't know why you want to represent yourself by doing things like that.

nonpareil · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Harshaw said:
How is that different? It's not like SGK isn't going to put the money it would have given to PP into some other venue concerning what they do, which IS women's health, so to even say this implies that PP = health and thus they're entitled to it.

So, if you don't give the money to the "right" place (PP), it's putting politics before health? Isn't demanding that SGK give its money to PP instead of wherever else it might decide to do so pretty much politics before health in its own right?

Well, that's part of being a bully. And a whole great lot of them did (including the ones who hacked SGK's web page and edited their Wikipedia entry).

Yeah, they were obviously pissed. And threw a tantrum. (And, oddly, proved PP didn't need SGK's money.)

PP =/= "women's health." Especially when there are obvious reasons to withhold grants, such as federal investigation into PP.

Now, on the abortion thing, which come ON, we all know is fueling this -- is it "pro-choice" or is it "pro-abortion"? Everyone insists it's the former. If SGK is making its choice by declining to fund it, why isn't that OK? Why isn't that a legitimate choice? To somehow say that it isn't means it's not really about "choice" at all, but about pushing abortion.

It's a legitimate choice for the Komen foundation to disqualy Planned Parenthood from funding, and people who think that's a poor decisions and pissed about it can make the legitimate choice to make a big deal of it, withhold donation or give the donation to Planned Parenthood instead. And then the Komen foundation can decide that the action it took was more harmful to its image and donation drive than it helps and make the legitimate choice to reverse the previous decision. All legal and legitimate. No one wants to make it illegal. See the difference between the pro-choice and the pro-life?

Harshaw · Feb 4, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

nonpareil said:
It's a legitimate choice for the Komen foundation to disqualy Planned Parenthood from funding, and people who think that's a poor decisions and pissed about it can make the legitimate choice to make a big deal of it, withhold donation or give the donation to Planned Parenthood instead. And then the Komen foundation can decide that the action it took was more harmful to its image and donation drive than it helps and make the legitimate choice to reverse the previous decision. All legal and legitimate. No one wants to make it illegal. See the difference between the pro-choice and the pro-life?

You say that as though you think I'm "pro-life."

I never said a thing which disagreed with any of this. I never said anyone shouldn't be allowed to say anything or be angry about anything.

And in turn, I'm free to consider the reaction to SGK's decision over-the-top bullying and state so, am I not?

As you'll probably agree that I am, I'm not sure what your motivation for this post is.

nonpareil · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

emdash said:
Don't underestimate the ratio of abortions to prenatal care; this pie chart is from 2008.

View attachment 67122054

Also of note, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood increases yearly by leaps and bounds, while the number of adoption referrals and prenatal visits dwindles. In 2007 the ratio of adoption referrals to abortions was a staggering 1 to 62. The 2008 ratio was 1 adoption for every 134 abortions, and the 2009 ratio was 1:340.

The 2010 ratio was 1 adoption referral for every 391 abortions.

Make your own conclusions, but I would prefer not to see Komen money spent on clinics that refer women elsewhere for breast exams while making abortion, an issue unrelated to Susan G. Komen, such a priority; cutting out the middle man--Planned Parenthood--would make each Komen dollar go much further in the battle against breast cancer. I would even go so far as to say that it would be more appropriate for Komen money to go to places that do not provide free or affordable oral contraceptives to teenagers and adults until the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer has been addressed.

I was disappointed by the un-de-funding this week, a move that seemed even more political to me than the decision to defund in the first place.

Another dishonest statistical peddler.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PP_Services.pdf

Why include things like pregnancy tests or contraceptive services when it might make abortion so much smaller as a percentage right?

emdash · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

DiAnna said:
Threads like this always make me incredibly said, as misinformation and carefully-edited for inacuracy information is thrown around with the "A" word. It has completely ignored women's health in an almost rabid attempt to enforce a political agenda on an agency that spends 97% of its resources on non-abortion related women's health issues, and offers low-to-no cost health care to women who frequently have no other place to go.

People are entitled to their personal views about abortion, but when it spreads into attempts to remove an extremely valuable asset to low and moderate income women's health care, it really kinda ticks me off. This whole thing was a political move, created by another political move by a conservative congressman, who also wishes to close down PP's 97% of non-abortion related health care to legislate his personal views, and force them on the entire country. Shame on him, and shame on the Komen Foundation.

The question, as I see it, is not whether Planned Parenthood is a valuable asset to society, but whether Komen's money would accomplish more for breast health somewhere else--perhaps to one of the clinics PP refers women to for mammograms. Planned Parenthood has demonstrated that it would not suffer without the Komen grant, which is actually a very small part of its income, so I fail to see why Komen cannot choose to give the grant to other low-income area healthcare facilities without this public outcry.

nonpareil · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Harshaw said:
You say that as though you think I'm "pro-life."

I never said a thing which disagreed with any of this. I never said anyone shouldn't be allowed to say anything or be angry about anything.

And in turn, I'm free to consider the reaction to SGK's decision over-the-top bullying and state so, am I not?

As you'll probably agree that I am, I'm not sure what your motivation for this post is.

I never claimed that you are pro-life. The motivation for the post is the same any other posts here, to make a point, whether you got the point or not doesn't negate that.

emdash · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

ThePlayDrive said:
It doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is that everything is linked to some disease so to say, "this might cause this so we shouldn't donate to this" is ridiculous in my opinion.

It does matter if your ambition is to eradicate breast cancer.

emdash · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

nonpareil said:
Another dishonest statistical peddler.

Why include things like pregnancy tests or contraceptive services when it might make abortion so much smaller as a percentage right?

A million pregnancy tests followed by over 300,000 abortions and less than 1,000 adoptions.

Oral contraceptives are acknowledged by the American Cancer Society to increase the risk of breast cancer. Susan G. Komen is dedicated to the eradication of breast cancer.

nonpareil · Feb 5, 2012

Harshaw said:
Well, I don't have a "side" the way you're saying.

But if there's going to be "understanding" -- if they do 750K breast exams per year, then SGK's $680K grant comes to about 91 cents per exam.

They're screaming and pitching a national screed over less than a dollar? They're going to tell a poor woman she can't get an exam over 91 cents?

If there's no $680K to hire the people for the breast exam or pay for any necessary equipments, there's no people or equipment to do the exam whether the women can pay 91cents or not.

Also, PP is a $1B/year operation. SGK's $680K represents less than 0.07% of that. As in, 99.93% of PP's operating budget remains intact. SGK's contribution is less than negligible any way you look at it.

But because of it, PP and its supporters have waged a national smear campaign against a foundation which until now they would have said does a tremendous amount of good for women's health.

So, really -- who's putting the "politics before health"?

The anti-Planned Parenthood paranoids. What falsehood have been said about the Komen foundation that it is a "smear campaign"? Planned Parenthood don't just get smeared, they get people who protest outside their clinics, and their workers threatened - all for the 3% of the services they provide, which is a legal medical procedure.

nonpareil · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

emdash said:
A million pregnancy tests followed by over 300,000 abortions and less than 1,000 adoptions.

Yes, and why is that not in the graph?

Oral contraceptives are acknowledged by the American Cancer Society to increase the risk of breast cancer. Susan G. Komen is dedicated to the eradication of breast cancer.

Has the Komen foundation comes out against oral contraceptives as part of its campaign against breast cancer?

ThePlayDrive · Feb 5, 2012

Re: Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

emdash said:
It does matter if your ambition is to eradicate breast cancer.

So since full term pregnancies increase the risk of breast cancer, should SGK start funding abortions?

Komen Reverses Decision On Funding PP

ThePlayDrive

1Perry

emdash

Old Soul

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot

Temporal

emdash

Old Soul

Attachments

lizzie

DiAnna

Hooter Babe

Renae

ThePlayDrive

ThePlayDrive

ThePlayDrive

ThePlayDrive

Renae

ThePlayDrive

nonpareil

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot

nonpareil

emdash

Old Soul

nonpareil

emdash

Old Soul

emdash

Old Soul

nonpareil

nonpareil

ThePlayDrive