Komen and Planned Parenthood

Pompeed

               The "some numbers", since they are skewed to support the preconceived point of view that compelled pregnancy as a matter of criminality with preferred politicians in everyone's bedroom and in every woman's medical exam room, come from exactly where?  Seems very peculiar when so many put up links to sources that none is offered.

               No objective, reputable, vettable source identified?  No credibitily for the "some numbers" sliced and diced out of whatever unidentified source was used to serve subjective purposes.

               All of the "Look over there -- a squirrel!!" diversionary tactics cannot move the ball off the issue: health care for women should not be the subject of political winds and whims.  There is no fence position on that.   

               One pro-politician side: some here are happy to have politicians make their health care decisions for them and are equally happy to compel others to be subject to the same political decisions whether those decisions are beneficial for their lives or not.

               The other side: most here, generally speaking, prefer to make their own health care decisions and choices with the assistance and consultation of their medical care providers and certainly without being subjected to political intrigues and interference. 

               There is no fence sitting position.  There is no grey.  It is either an all black or all an white choice.

            

lago

I know I have donated to many Christian organizations but I am not Christian. The money I donate doesn't go to religious education it goes to help those in need. Granted if I found out my funds were going to "convert" the masses I would pull my funds.

My point is that there are many out there that do things I don't believe or support but do good. As long as it isn't against the law and my donations aren't being used for the activities I don't support I'm OK with giving to that organization. 

If I only supported organizations or politicians that supported my views 100% I would never donate or vote.

Pompeed

            Let's have 6700 more women dead from breast cancer which, had it been caught early, could have given the same women a much longer life. 

            Great idea there: add to the annual national death by breast cancer statistics in a country which has the technological resources to drive the numbers down rather than driving them up. 

             Hands up from those here who vote for the result of putting the lives of 6700 more women at stake. 

              Hands up from those here who are willing to join that risk pool of 6700.  Or have their daughters or sisters or mothers or friends join it. 

              Funny how making that result for someone else concrete and applicable to oneself or one's own doesn't get much traction. 

              Edited to add: Good Morning, Lago!

RetiredLibby

It is not about dollars. It is about women served and where they are served -- and what kinds of medical services are available to them.



And I am absolutely fascinated by the "bullying" meme. Really, I am.



So, certain people and certain groups choose to not give money to Komen, or to stop contributing, when they find out that Komen gives grants to Planned Parenthood, in a effort to make Komen stop giving grant money to PP that goes strictly for mammograms and breast cancer screenings. These certain people presumably boycott companies and other entities that support Planned Parenthood as well, in an economic effort to make these companies and entities stop supporting Planned Parenthood. They make it a point to talk about, disseminate information on their economic activities against supporters of PP and try to encourage others to join them. I think that is great, and it is their right to do so.



HOWEVER, when certain OTHER groups who support Planned Parenthood decide that they will withdraw their support for Komen because they disagree with an action Komen has taken, like discontinuing grants to Planned Parenthood, and/or stop supporting companies or entities that support Komen, that is "bullying" or "rubbing Komen's face in the mud" or, as I have heard in another context on other boycotts, "economic terrorism." So why is it OK for one set of people to not support Komen because of their actions and NOT OK for other people to not support Komen because of their actions?



As it has been pointed out before, Komen is free to disperse grant monies where it will. And I am free to spend my charity dollars where I will, and because I disagree with Komen's actions, I will do just that. And that doesn't make me a bully or a crybaby or an economic terrorist -- it makes me an American who is free to decide what I will support and what I will not with my personal money.



And DO NOT go there with tax dollars. There are lots of things I do not support being done with my tax dollars, but they are being done. Get over that.



So, really, the bullying meme is fascinating. A complete and utter falsehood, but wildly entertaining to watch people try to explain.



L

Pompeed

Happy LIbbly: I am getting a real education from you.  Thanks!

Pompeed

Faye wrote:

"If a household making $50,000 saw this kind of a reduction in their salary, it would equate to $85 a year, or $1.64 a week . . ."

             Wow!  What a life affirming position this is!  Deserves a standing ovation.  This is a very well argued method to beat up on poor women. Of which there are millions in the US, and of those millions, most have a whole lot less than $50K in either gross or net annual income.

              Lucky for some here making this argument that THEY are not walking in those shoes for reasons beyond their control.  And the same proponents of this point of view would not want to walk in them or volunteer to walk in them either.   

             

Wabbit

Komen is not the victim here.  They instigated the whole thing and went out of their way to announce that they would not be sending grants to PP anymore.  They did that to play politics ... period.  It was not about providing services ... it was about publically whacking PP as part of somebody's personal political agenda.

It is also not about the $$$ amounts.  It is about the decision being motivated by political considerations instead of the interests of breast cancer patients. 

I did not hear about it from PP.  I saw it on the news ... that's how PP found out also.  It stank ... and we smelled the stink.  I went to PP's website on my own and found the donate button.

It cracks me up to see folks trying to spin this whole bunch of crappola into a story of how 'poor Komen was just sitting there minding their own business and those PP bullies went after them'.  Not even close!  

Pompeed

            Thank you for the clarity, White Rabbit. 

            Amazing how much spin and blovation and deception some people will "buy" as fact.

      

Anonymous

Those journalists (Breitbart) do some really good investigative reporting.  How can you say it's edited?

Yes, it's all Bush's fault and the horrible republicans who want to kill women, throw Grandma over the cliff, and other lies the democrats can come up with.  Oh, and Romney isn't worried about the poor.  Of course the opposition will definitely leave out the true context of that sentence.  Poor choice of words by Romney?  Oh, you better believe it because we see HOW it's playing out.  But, of course, we won't mention the democrat whose running for re-election and his many gaffes.

Oh, I'm sorry.  I didn't mean to make this political.  I was just following the lead of others here who are making it sound like the bad, bad right-wingers are at fault.

Besides, I thought that we were not supposed to "talk" politics on this board.

I won't be back to reply to anyone.  Nor do I expect any of you to reply to my post.  Our country is going into the crapper and here we are fighting about who's right and whose wrong about this Komen and PP issue.  And most of you do not donate or support Komen for various reasons so why do you care?

lago

I can honestly say I have donated to Komen for years, decades long before diagnosis. BTW I am the first in my family to get BC.

Enjoyful

Planned Parenthood provides a breast cancer screening gateway for underserved men and women.

Planned Parenthood gets money from Komen for that purpose.

Komen hired an anti-PP, anti-abortion person to be VP of Policy.

Komen discontinues PP funding, citing a new change in policy.

Komen doesn't apply that new policy to other organizations that receive Komen funding.

Therefore, Komen is 1) singling PP out, and 2) being dishonest about it.

Man up and say you're not funding PP because they also provide abortions.  Then apply that line of thought consistently.  Why is that so hard?

Do I have any of my facts wrong? 

angelsister

Those seem to be the facts. I have gotten annoyed at some of the things written because of duplicity. Not because people dont have a right to their views, but again 'man-up' and admit it, you object to some of what PP do snd you think that is more important than bc screening; that is a challenge to komen and the people trying to divert attention to the right or wrong of PP. Komen have been caught out and the weight of public opinion has made them apologise, but i fear they have put the bc cause back and the lives of women in jeopardy because of it. I read about the 'only 6700' mammos' anyway which some apparently consider to be no big deal? Is it because they and their families dont need PP's services? If so they are very lucky and I have lost even more faith in our ability to make a difference and stand together to say enough is enough when it comes to BC/p>

Enjoyful

And of course, PP does get funding from other places.  I don't think that's the primary reason for the outcry.  It's that Komen cut off PP for what are surely political reasons but instead of taking responsibility for it came up with a lame-ass excuse.  I thought conservatives were all about taking responsibility for one's actions?

angelsister

Hillck i too was commenting on fayes assertion that withdrawing grants 'wasnt going to make a significant difference' which in my view is a rather glib way to view 6700 potentially life saving procedures.

Pompeed

            No one is now or has been talking about anyone's particular politics.  Or political affiliation or lack thereof.  Personal politics are irrelevant.

            The only relevant reference: Komen's actions undertaken which put the political interests of Komen insiders above the health care interests of American women.

jacee

Pompeed-  "Hands up from those here who vote for the result of putting the lives of 6700 more women at stake."

It gets alot of traction with me. That  is exactly how I feel about the many abortions. I do not place the life of a woman as any more valuable than a baby. Life is life. If you don't believe an unborn baby is life, that is your right. But that is the heart of this whole argument for the pro lifer. I see it as the unborn babies being unheard and underserved with the same passion as you see women being underserved.We will have to agree to disagree.

angelsister

Precisely pompeed!



Id said glibly on another thread that i didnt care why people didnt give to komen now but it was pointed out that if komen donations drop its by no means certain that those donations will go to other bc charities and surely the last thing any of us want is less money and energy going to bc research and services. I know people keep saying no one has to give to komen but the thing is that so many already have and the outcry about those dollars and the consequent power has been diverted to further personal aims which have nothing to do with bc

angelsister

Komen was not funding abortions! Your view on abortion or mine is not the issue here jacee

shokk

Goodness gracious.........when are you people going to stop???????

I find it a bit ironic that the same people that were smeared and attacked at a obsolete, unimportant rate a non profit site are doing and exhibiting the same behavior toward Komen.......

is anyone really surprised by Komen's actions......let's face it Komen was trying to walk the fence to make everyone happy.......you will notice that in the Northeast and on the West Coast they were not going to stop funding PP but was "suggesting that they were in the heartland of America while PP was under investigation..........

because of the dribble up poverty economics we are currently living in everyone is hurting and not meeting financial goals and hit especially hard are Non Profits and Charity organizations.......

and this is all about MONEY and anyone that suggests that it is not is either being dishonest or is just plain naive........

I have never contributed to Komen nor would I.......Komen funding PP was only one small reason that I made that decision six years ago...... when I see a Non Profit most of their contributions goes to "Public Awareness" only tells me that is how they raise additional money......and when the majority of their contributions are going to "Education and or Public Awareness" that means that less is actually going to research...........most of the money raised will be used in marketing itself so that the Non Profit can raise even more money.......which is fine.......they have a right to do that........that is the way most Non Profits work........which is what Public Relations is all about.......presenting a person or company in a positive light.........

But just remember that for all actions there are reactions and when you have a huge Non Profit like Komen you go out of your way to hurt them you are also going to hurt other Non Profits and Public companies that rely on contributions by Komen such as NPR and PBS....(Komen contributes a lot of money to both).........Komen is very involved in the Arts and grants and loans for education and scholarships.......(kids that need help with college in which one of their parents have had breast cancer)............

Before you guys sit up there on your high horses.....and throw stones at Komen maybe a better tactic would send your money to PP directly or to some other breast cancer non profit or better yet right here at bc.org that has to actually "educated" more women about bc they all the other bc non profits put together......where else can you get free information and help as vast as right here with no one asking you to contribute anything.......and talk and communicate with other bc survivors about their own experiences........

and maybe listen to something more than likely your Mothers told you at one time.......if you don't have something nice to say maybe you shouldn't say anything at all..........

shokk

Enjoyful

This issue has NOTHING TO DO WITH ABORTIONS and everything with the transparency, honesty, and responsibility of the Komen organization.  

Can we all admit that Komen made a decision based on a change in policy, but didn't apply that policy to other organizations?  

LovesChristmas-Barb

Well said Jacee. When you see an unborn baby as a human being then you see abortion as murder and you believe that the life of an unborn child is just as valuable as anyone else's life. I don't want to see anyone die, women or babies, and as a result I can't overlook the evil that PP is doing and I know that there are other places that women can be screened for breast cancer and receive care.

Faye33

Here are your sources:

I've read different numbers as to what Komen gives PP, usually around $600,000, as this article states.

http://www.digtriad.com/news/local/article/212363/57/Planned-Parenthood-Offers-More-Than-You-Think

I am taking PP revenue numbers from their annual report.  For some reason, I can't get the link to work here, but it is at PP's website.

http://issuu.com/actionfund/docs/ppfa_financials_2010_122711_web_vf?mode=window&viewMode=doublePage

According to PP annual report (2010), government funding and grants totalled $487.4 million.

So, based off these numbers Komen's grants equate to about .12% (yes, there is a decimal in there) of PP revenue, based only on what the government gives them.

So, to put it in perspective, for a family making $50,000 a year, this would equate to a loss of approximately $60, or $1.15/week.

Now, if we want the whole picture,  PP total revenues were $1.048 billion.  This makes Komen's grants about .06% of PPs total revenue.

For a family making $50,000 a year, the Komen loss would equate to approximately $30 a year, or $0.58 a week.

So, yes, pompeed, I did skew it... in favor of PP.  My intention wasn't to be inaccurate, it was to prove a point. You wanted the proof, here it is.

So, again, who thinks it's about protecting women's healthcare now?

Enjoyful

Whatever money Komen gave was then used for breast screening.  You go and tell those women, however many there are, that they won't get breast screening now.  And you tell them in person.  And if any one of them gets cancer and it goes undetected and eventually kills them, you tell them how insignificant Komen's contribution was.

RetiredLibby

Look! Over there! It's a shiny squirrel doing the shimmy in a hula skirt! Scoot, I'm afraid there will be no such admissions. Deflect, distract, bob and weave, dodge the issue is the order of the day.



People are discontinuing their contributions to Komen because Komen entered partisan politics by appointing a partisan political figure as their VP for Public Policy and then acted on her stated partisan political agenda. It wasn't about abortion until those who favored the move began gloating about PP losing funding because they peform abortions,



The people who will no longer contribute to Komen are the people who object to Komen's turning breast cancer screening into a partisan political issue. They are voting with their dollars.



The people who support PP are also voting with their dollars.



If Komen couldn't stand the political heat, they should not have leapt into the political fire.



The dollar amount isn't about how much per family, etc. The mathematics lesson has about as much to do with this discussion as the fact that I am wearing green sweatpants and didn't use a hairdryer to dry my hair today. It is irrelevant. The fact that Komen discontinued grants that helped women in need get mammograms is important, is the reason why they did that -- a completely political decision. It is about women's health care sacrificed on the altar of partisan politics because *some people* object to *some things* that Planned Parenthood does.



Komen wasn't overtly political. Now they are. They are suffering the consequences as their supporters feel angry and betrayed and are exercising their right defund Komen.



L

angelsister

We get your point faye, 600000 and the 6700 mammos that buys is not important, in fact its so insignificant to you that its worth about 58 cents, we get it. Thing is faye its pretty significant to the ladies attending for the mammo's! some of whom may even be here on the boards 'just diagnosed' or 'waiting and worried' do you get my point faye?

Faye33

Anonymous

Komen was still going to give the same amount of money to pay for breast screening, they were just going to give it to other organizations. 

PP was able to raise more money than they were ever at risk of losing, so no woman was in danger of not getting a screening from them due to lack of funding, as long as PP decided to use the additional donations for those screenings, and not direct it to other priorities..

The big losers here are the additional women who would have been helped if Komen had not been bullied into restoring the funding to PP and would have been able to expand the places where women can go for screening, because not every low income woman lives in an urban area served by PP.

If the only "choice" you are willing to allow someone else is the one that you decide on for them, then you are not really pro-choice.

angelsister

Do you get my point faye?

RetiredLibby

Anti-Choicers: Shut up and have that baby, but don't expect us to feed it or you.

Pompeed

             At issue is the political manipulation of the health and welfare of women now alive.  Those are the people who were most threatened by what Komen did.   

             One cannot be on the fence on the subject.  There is no fence straddle fence sitting position.  One is either an advocate for the medical interests of the women of America (and by extention, the World) to be held within their own power and under their own individual control.  Or one is an advocate for the medical interests of women to be held by and manipulated at the whim of self-interested politicians to serve their personal and political purposes.  Which we have now seen as being supported by a nationally known non-profit which purported to have women's health interests, and more specifically breast cancer, as its only mission.

             Choose.  Take one's pick.  There is no middle ground.

             Neither one of those choices has anything whatsoever to do with state compelled pregnancy.  The state compelled pregnancy position has nothing to do with what is at stake for women presently alive.  Talking about state compelled pregnancy is a very deliberate diversion from the issue at hand: if you want your health care determined by politicians, raise your hand for that and if you want your health care determined by your own choices and your own conscience, raise your hand for that. 

             I do wonder why (and it is only my own musing) the life of a woman today, in terms of her own health and welfare, would or could be thought less valuable then two connected cells not even known to her.  Fact is: if that woman has a very fast track breast cancer and she has it because she was never given adequate surveillance care and followup of baseline findings, the two cells won't be much when she's dead next month.  Does not strike me as a "pro-life" position at all.

             According to Faye's "numbers" -- and we still don't know where any of those came from because there's no citation to source now and likely none coming -- the impact of what Komen did terms of women alive today turns out to be: about 6700 of them put at higher risk of breast cancer and dying from it due to lack of surveillance when the maths are all said and done with a sharp pencil.  According to Faye, those lives are worth a few pennies a day.

            I haven't seen anyone here raise their hand and say they are willing to take the place of one of those women put at greater risk.  Or willing to have their mother or sister or daughter or auntie or close friend take the place of one of them either. The silence is deafening. 

             The issue of what Komen has done in an attempt to put the lives of women at greater risk to serve political interests has nothing whatsoever to do with the social or religious politics of some individuals who favor state and religiously compelled pregnancies strictly enforced against all women, regardless of individual conscience, by threat of criminal sanctions.