Why Did Komen Stop? Planned Parenthood Doesn't Do Mammograms

  • Thread starter Thread starter juliee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. There would simply be no reason to provide money to PP which doesn’t do mammograms. The funds are better spent elsewhere. All the grant did was give them cover to make the public think they are something other than an abortion clinic which hands out condoms to enable extramarital sex.
 
That this story has generated so much negative publicity for Komen is truly unfortunate. Those who have voiced criticism have done so in a manner which reflects a belief that Komen is somehow obliged to provide this funding, or simply evil for withdrawing it. Since when is any person or organization (i) obligated to financially support others and (ii) not within its rights to change its mind or redirect its resources elsewhere?

IMHO - Komen does a lot more good than PP could ever hope to …
 
That this story has generated so much negative publicity for Komen is truly unfortunate. Those who have voiced criticism have done so in a manner which reflects a belief that Komen is somehow obliged to provide this funding, or simply evil for withdrawing it. Since when is any person or organization (i) obligated to financially support others and (ii) not within its rights to change its mind or redirect its resources elsewhere?

IMHO - Komen does a lot more good than PP could ever hope to …
Yes, many pro-life people have refrained from donating to Komen because of it’s link to Planned Parenthood, a truly evil entity. Now that that link has been broken, I hope that pro-life people will contribute to Komen. And their grants will certainly be more wisely spent by not going to PP.
 
Regarding this issue of mammorgrams…

I had left a comment on Konen’s Facebook Wall, where much criticism was being posted of it’s decision to no longer provide funds for Planned Parenthood (save the grants for three PP facilities which will not be interrupted, if I remember correctly the agreement runs through April 2013).

I said: "Please stand your ground. Firmly. You are not (morally) obligated to channel your funding for breast cancer awareness services through Planned Parenthood (not the least reason of which is that it does not provide mammograms at its clinics). An organization (Komen) dedicated to the preservation of life, should not enable an organization that designedly, as part of its mission, is regularly responsible for the death of the most innocent and vulnerable of human lives. Your decision to susbstantially sever ties with Planned Parenthood and instead choose to allocate funds directly to breast cancer relief networks, is commendable. Planned Parenthood’s reason for existence was certainly not, and is not, to battle cancer. Your’s is. "

I received the following comments underneath:

Nicole: "Ana, they do provide mammograms. I receive mine there. "

Marc: “Planned Parenthood clinics don’t perform mammograms on site (and PP doesn’t claim otherwise). (My wife’s gynecologist doesn’t, either–mammograms are performed by radiologists, not gynecologists.) Instead, PP refers women to radiology offices for the procedure and then foots the bill themselves. If you got pissed off when your mom said she got you a massage for your birthday and then handed you a gift certificate and not an actual masseuse, this will bother you. Otherwise, you’re probably okay with it.”

Angela: “Jeez Marc how can you keep copy-pasting that **** RIGHT AFTER someone who just said they GET THEIR MAMMOGRAMS AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD??? You should be ashamed of yourself!”

Me: "Angela, Nicole, Marc: Then apparently the situation is some clinics do, and others don’t.

I must say though that having surveyed comments that criticize Konen’s decision, many people, at least as indicated by their word-choice, seem to believe that mammograms are normatively provided at PP facilities."​

And as far as I’m aware, it is not normative for PP to offer mammograms on site, but it someone has a source documenting otherwise, please share it here.
 
Yes, many pro-life people have refrained from donating to Komen because of it’s link to Planned Parenthood, a truly evil entity. Now that that link has been broken, I hope that pro-life people will contribute to Komen. And their grants will certainly be more wisely spent by not going to PP.
Komen donations up 100%
dailycaller.com/2012/02/02/after-cutting-ties-with-planned-parenthood-komen-donations-up-100-percent/

It seems that many pro-life people have been waiting for this decision.
 
In case anyone wants accurate information:

Planned Parenthood, as far as I know, owns no mammogram machines. Maybe some clinic someplace has one, but I never heard of it. They do pelvics, PAPS, breast examination and teaching women to do this themselves. (They also do flu vaccines, thyroid function and a lot of other things, but that’s off-topic.)

What did they use the Komen Money for? Were they lying?

No. When Planned Parenthood referred a woman to another facility for a mammogram, they also PAID FOR IT, either wholly or in part with the Komen money. See, **it’s a fund for providing breast cancer detection and education. ** The Komen money only paid for these expenses. For instance, a woman might have both breast exam and PAP smear sent to a lab. Komen money pays for a mammogram, but not the PAP, as I understand it.

In one state here in New England, there are two Planned Parenthood clinics that are primarily ordered for these specific things: women’s testing and education around cancer issues.

The women the Komen money paid for were usually between the ages of 45-60, they deal in large part with women in shelters (battered and homeless) and also in halfway houses, who have no resources.

These “free clinics” people keep talking about are a fantasy. “Obama care” might kick in someday, who knows.

Without this money belong replaced, the only thing that was accomplished is: women will die of cancers that could have been caught and treated early. Not one abortion will be halted. Not one unborn life saved. Only harm would result to some of the neediest women in our culture.

The reaction to the news (which was known to Planned Parenthood higher-ups since December) has been a flood of angry calls from donors to Planned Parenthood asking, “How much more do you need?” Komen also has commitments for money through a certain period of time, so, with God’s grace and the help of caring people, these women will not be abandoned and these life-saving services will not disappear and women will not suffer and die needlessly.

The Koman Foundation was never in the dark as to how their money was used nor led to believe Planned Parenthood would run out and buy a lot of mammogram machines.
 
Without this money belong replaced, the only thing that was accomplished is: women will die of cancers that could have been caught and treated early. Not one abortion will be halted. Not one unborn life saved. Only harm would result to some of the neediest women in our culture.
So, why can’t PP move some of its money from abortion services to mammogram services? It seems to me that if they are truly interested in saving lives, they would devote their abortion money to life saving activities like mammograms and stop killing people.
The reaction to the news (which was known to Planned Parenthood higher-ups since December) has been a flood of angry calls from donors to Planned Parenthood asking, “How much more do you need?”
Then why do they need Komen money?

I will never support Komen if they support PP. Period. I bet more women, in the womb, die at PP than die from breast cancer because Komen didn’t support PP.

Peace

Tim
 
Apparently, they hadn’t checked with their treasurer before making that announcement. Their donations are up considerably in the past two day (at least, they were …).
 
Apparently, they hadn’t checked with their treasurer before making that announcement. Their donations are up considerably in the past two day (at least, they were …).
Well, if they are going to continue their association with PP, donations from pro-life people will–and should–dry up.

But billionaire Bloomberg has got millions to give to pro-abortion groups like PP, so he’ll be happy to contribute to the abortion minded Planned Parenthood.
 
In a time when money is difficult to come by and daily people are losing jobs, homes and hope for the future – an organization that is in place solely to provide low/no cost medical screening and treatment to women (who are at least 50% of the folks affected by this economic crisis) is under attack.

We should all think very carefully about why an issue like this would even occur at this time in our history – the year 2012. How in the world can an issue of women’s HEALTH - 50% of the planet’s population - be politicized? Can you even imagine us having a conversation about men’s health??! How much longer are we going to allow this marginalization to occur? Do you want your daughters to grow up continuing to be seen as issue that people can fight about and make decisions about as if we are not actually part of this system?

You should embrace whatever your political doctrine, spiritual belief or social conscience steers you to embrace – and celebrate the fact that we live in a country where that is possible. But you might also want to spend some time thinking about the following:

• Man or Woman - You might end up with little to no financial or healthcare resources at some point and need to take advantage of services that are provided for those in just such situations. Wouldn’t it be awful if there were no more services left to help you?

• Women make up more than 50% of the workforce and an increasing percentage of the political leadership – perhaps it is time to step forward and begin to LEAD in a meaningful way. Pay attention to what is going on around you and make good choices that will continue to help women take their places as equal partners in every way.

And if you have never recieved treatment at Planned Parenthood - as I have many, many times when I did not have access to other healthcare - annual gyno checkups and pap smears - then perhaps you should be very, very careful about “telling” everyone that the organization is only about providing abortions.

It would be great if we could move toward the ideal that we are all human beings, deserving of being seen as equally important, not as second class citizens to be used as political footballs – to be discussed and have decisions made about as if we are not actually standing in the room. I hope you will do the same, by modeling the behavior that shows we can live in a harmonious way, working together, rather than in the classic war model where someone must lose in order for someone else to win and everyone is fair game; especially women.
 
I think we should care about all women, including those who are about to be killed in the womb, and PP is the largest abortion provider in the country.

Back at the outset of the sexual revolution, it was PP who facilitated pre-marital sex by providing birth control to teens without their parents approval. If PP was providing it, it must be okay. Now we have had an explosion in the number and types of sexually transmitted diseases, fatherless families, women in poverty, all facilitated by this attack on the family of which PP was and continues to be an enabler.
 
Hi Jim,

That is an interesting viewpoint on how this has all happened. I’m never certain if organizations can be blamed for things being the way they are - or people. It seems to me that the breakdown of social values and the increase in problems has much more to do with the way people are approaching raising their children and the values they are (or are not) instilling in them, rather than the existence of organizations.

It is certainly something to think about.
 
Hi Jim,

That is an interesting viewpoint on how this has all happened. I’m never certain if organizations can be blamed for things being the way they are - or people. It seems to me that the breakdown of social values and the increase in problems has much more to do with the way people are approaching raising their children and the values they are (or are not) instilling in them, rather than the existence of organizations.

It is certainly something to think about.
I was in my 20’s when the sexual revolution first got going. Organizations like Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, NOW, and a great many others took the initiative to proclaim sexual freedom, particularly for women. There was an author who wrote a book for young girls, during which the protagonist had her first sexual experiences. I never read the book at the time, but it is still in print, and still being directed to young girls. I went back and read it a few years ago. One of the aspects of it was that girl’s visit to a PP clinic to obtain birth control pills. In a forward to the recent edition she said that if she were writing it now, she would have emphasized condoms in addition to pills, because of so many STD’s.

Well, it was precisely the sexual behavior advocated by these organizations that taught and enabled and facilited the spread of those diseases, and of course brought in a booming abortion business for PP. Not only that, but it was these same organizations which took over the sex education of children in our schools.
 
No. When Planned Parenthood referred a woman to another facility for a mammogram, they also PAID FOR IT, either wholly or in part with the Komen money. See, **it’s a fund for providing breast cancer detection and education. ** The Komen money only paid for these expenses. For instance, a woman might have both breast exam and PAP smear sent to a lab. Komen money pays for a mammogram, but not the PAP, as I understand it.
This is an issue that would be worth bringing to the Moral Theology section to discuss more thoroughly.

Is it sinful to donate money toward a specific cause (e.g. breast screenings) fully knowing that the donation recipient which services that cause, is an organization (PP) that is also designedly responsible for evil (abortion)? In such a case, your intended donation is to the mammograms, and it is NOT your intention to fund abortion.

If we say “yes it is sinful” or “it is not morally justifiable”, then what implications does this have with regards to paying taxes when you know tax dollars are allocated to things that are contrary to the moral law? In other words, do we apply our logic consistently?
 
If we say “yes it is sinful” or “it is not morally justifiable”, then what implications does this have with regards to paying taxes when you know tax dollars are allocated to things that are contrary to the moral law? In other words, do we apply our logic consistently?
Paying taxes is mandatory under the law. Donations are voluntary. Unless there is a direct conflict between obedience to the law and our properly developed Catholic moral conscience, we are called to be obedient to civil authority. If it were a tax specifically for abortion purposes, for instance, there would likely be a call from our higher authority to disobey the lower authority (government). Otherwise, typically we are to be obedient.

Donations fall exclusively under the directives of the higher authority and therefore our voluntary giving must not conflict with moral teaching.
 
and if you have never recieved treatment at planned parenthood - as i have many, many times when i did not have access to other healthcare - annual gyno checkups and pap smears - then perhaps you should be very, very careful about “telling” everyone that the organization is only about providing abortions.
OK, so only 40% of their clinic income comes from killing children. I imagine a great deal of it comes from contraception (another intrinsic evil). Pope John Paul II, in Evangelium Vitae explained the connection between abortion and the contraceptive mentality: “contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree.”
lifenews.com/2011/02/23/new-planned-parenthood-report-record-abortions-done-in-2009/
The new document the abortion organization posted shows Planned Parenthood provided prenatal services to merely 7,021 women and referred only 977 women for adoption services. These numbers were a 25 percent drop in prenatal care clients and a whopping 59 percent decline in adoption referrals from the 2,405 adoption referrals in 2008. The abortion business helped only 9,433 prenatal clients in 2008, down substantially from the 11,000 women it provided prenatal care to in 2007 — showing health care given to pregnant woman has fallen substantially over the years.
As a result, 97.6 percent of pregnant women going to Planned Parenthood are sold abortions while less than 2.4 percent of pregnant women received non-abortion services including adoption and prenatal care. That’s up from 96.5 percent of pregnant women going to Planned Parenthood getting abortions in 2008.
“Despite its protestations that abortion is only a small part of its services,” said Jim Sedlak, vice president of the pro-life group American Life League, “Planned Parenthood has increased its number of abortions for 15 straight years. During that time, it has gone from committing 9.3 percent of all abortions in the United States to committing 27.5 percent.”
“We estimate that the income from abortion accounts for 40 percent of its annual clinic income,” he said, adding that former Planned Parenthood clinics director Abby Johnson has testified repeatedly to the pressure local affiliates receive to do more abortions because Planned Parenthood makes more money from abortions than non-abortion services.
 
I am glad that some needy women were able to get needed PAP smears and other screenings, even at Planned Parenthood.

But a few things: apparently, Susan Komen was proAbortion. It would seem that way, because her sister sent a letter or email to the Foundation blasting them for withdrawing their money to PP because Susan would have never backed down, referring to proLife urgings to stop the PP funding. I hope I am wrong about this, but then again, these days??

More importantly, even if Susan Komen had been proLife, WHO founded Planned Parenthood and WHY was it founded? This too is critical.
Margaret Sanger founded this organization. An admirer, openly, of Hitlers’ demon-inspired theories about a Master Race, which she called “a race of Thoroughbreds,” Sanger advocated openly eugenic sterilization of ALL racial minorities, whom she regularly referred to as Human Weeds. WHO were these human weeds? Anybody not white / aryan. In other words, people of Semitic (Jewish), Mediterranean, Hispanic, and African descent especially. In other words, racial minorities. To accomplish the tremendous reduction of these people’s birthrates, she founded the Birth Control League, which was renamed Planned Parenthood. This organization had thoroughly racist origins and was founded to keep minorities in check and reduce their birthrates because they were a drain on the white (or as Hitler called it, the Aryan) race. This is utterly despicable.
Interestingly, a recent female BLACK president of Planned Parenthood, instead of denouncing the organization’s founder as a racist elitist BIGOT, called her “courageous.” That would be, and is, like a Jewish Rabbi praising Heinrich Himmler or Hitler himself. It is utterly disgusting. As if the woman’s horrendously evil views were just a big joke and what the hell, who cares?? By the way, this same woman (Sanger) was closely allied, in more ways than one (if you know what I mean) with Roger Baldwin. Now just guess what Organization Mr. Baldwin founded??? Google it. You’ll see.

While PP today doesn’t openly profess any racism, it IS interesting that the majority of their clinics are either in or very near, minority neighborhoods. I wonder if that is out of genuine concern for providing free PAP smears to low-income black women. I have to doubt it. And besides, over 95% of PP activities are abortion-related. THAT is most significant of all. I am glad to know that Komen backed down. I read the loathesome comments of the organizations chairwoman, wherein she replied to pressure from bullies – yes, bullies – and that they would NEVER buckle to that. WE prolifers, folks, are the falsely, libellously so-called “Bullies” she was referring to.
Let’s put it boldly: if you condone baby killing, you shouldn’t expect God to protect
you from getting breast, or any other, kind of cancer. In fact, you just might tick him off enough to punish you by maybe even CAUSING you to get it.
Harsh words? Unloving words? God would never do this?? Or He only did this in the Old Testament?
BALDERDASH.
In the NT, Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead for ONE LIE.
In the NT, people who sacrilegiously received Communion got sick and many died (at God’s direct act) and Saint Paul flat-out PLAINLY SAID that those sins were the reason that they got sick and died. In Apocalypse, Jesus flat out said that the woman Jezebel, a false teacher in the Church who taught people that fornication was okay (heck, today entire denominations - and even some “Catholic” priests - are PROMOTING gay marriage AND abortion, talk about Jezebels!!) was about to be killed, DIRECTLY BY HIM, our Jesus Of Mercy, the Prince of Peace.
We REALLY better watch it. He HASN’T changed.Yet “Catholic” proAbort politicians are walked up the aisle in the Cathedral in the Nation’s Capital like Catholic heroes of the faith, one on one side and one on the other, side by side, with the Archbishop, who just finished giving these defiant proAborts communion!! This is absolutely incredible. You call this 'shepherding"?? These people are far worse criminals than most people in jail, including Bernie Madoff, whose sins were (though grave) only financial. We are talking about the deliberate murder of babies, some of them even after being born-alive, here. Yet no public declarations of excommunication, nothing, the bishops continue to give the proAborts communion like nothing is wrong at all, and a majority of “Catholics” knowingly continue to vote for these Apostates. Even at times, right on these forums, attempting to justify their deliberate vote for the proAbort (“abortion isn’t the only issue” and other nonsense) when they COULD have voted for a proLifer. This is no less serious than knowingly voting for the Nazis when you KNOW that once in office, with your vote, they plan on killing off the Jewish people. There is no difference whatsoever. People are knowingly voting for those who deliberately enable the killing of infants, unborn and sometimes even born-alive.
Some good people are calling for “ONE MILLION ROSARIES FOR THE UNBORN” to be prayed. How many of those one million will salve their conscience by praying that one rosary for the unborn, and then go out in November and re-elect the current proAbortion crowd? I have to wonder. This is so very, very sad.
 
Hi Jim,

That is an interesting viewpoint on how this has all happened. I’m never certain if organizations can be blamed for things being the way they are - or people. It seems to me that the breakdown of social values and the increase in problems has much more to do with the way people are approaching raising their children and the values they are (or are not) instilling in them, rather than the existence of organizations.

It is certainly something to think about.
But responsibility likewise falls on the legislators who have promoted and approved abortion laws, and, to the extent that they have a say in the matter, on the administrators of the health-care centres where abortions are performed. A general and no less serious responsibility lies with those who have encouraged the spread of an attitude of sexual permissiveness and a lack of esteem for motherhood, and with those who should have ensured-but did not-effective family and social policies in support of families, especially larger families and those with particular financial and educational needs. Finally, one cannot overlook the network of complicity which reaches out to include international institutions, foundations and associations which systematically campaign for the legalization and spread of abortion in the world. In this sense abortion goes beyond the responsibility of individuals and beyond the harm done to them, and takes on a distinctly social dimension. It is a most serious wound inflicted on society and its culture by the very people who ought to be society’s promoters and defenders. As I wrote in my Letter to Families, “we are facing an immense threat to life: not only to the life of individuals but also to that of civilization itself”.56 We are facing what can be called a “structure of sin” which opposes human life not yet born.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top