E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNBC's Andrea Mitchell today interviewed Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, which has decided to end much of its funding for Planned Parenthood.
Mitchell also interviewed Democratic Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who disagree with the foundation's decision.
In her first interview since the decision, Amb. Nancy Brinker explains why the Susan G. Komen Foundation chose to halt funding to Planned Parenthood. Sen. Barbara Boxer and Sen. Patty Murphy then join to respond.
A transcript is below...
ANDREA MITCHELL, MSNBC HOST: Women and men across the country are expressing anger and outrage over the Susan G. Komen Foundation's decision to end funding to Planned Parenthood. That funding provided breast screening and other breast health services for low-income men and uninsured women. And the backlash has been fierce online and on the streets. Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards spoke earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, PLANNED PARENTHOOD: We were very shocked and really surprised. I really hope that they will rethink this decision and that we can become partners again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MITCHELL: Richards was on with Alex Wagner in the earlier hour. Ambassador Nancy Brinker is the founder and CEO of Susan G. Komen for the Cure and joins me now.
Well, the storm has exploded, and you've been in this for a long time. You started Susan G. Komen in 1982 after the death of your sister and in her name. And you have raised more money than any other group for breast cancer research.
Which is why I have to tell you this is shocking for a lot of your long-time supporters. I want to give you a chance to answer -- let me just tell you what I was confronted with at the gym this morning. A woman came over to me, I had not met her before, gray-haired woman, probably in her 60s, she was wearing a gray T-shirt, and she said, "Look at my T-shirt. It's inside out. I put it on by accident today. I'm not going to wear it anymore. I've torn the label out. It's a Komen T-shirt."
These are longtime supporters who have run with you, who have supported you financially and otherwise. So they're asking, how could this have taken place?
NANCY BRINKER, FOUNDER AND CEO, SUSAN G. KOMEN FOUNDATION: Well, Andrea, I frankly think, I don't know, it's a mischaracterization, of certainly, of our goals, our mission, and everything that we do. In fact, we haven't defunded Planned Parenthood. We still have three grants that we've committed to, at least for another year, through the end of the grant cycle, and we’re going to --
MITCHELL: But that's just through the end of the grant cycle. Let me just put out there first of all, that I have been very identified, an outspoken supporter and participant in the races over the years long before I, myself, ended up being diagnosed with breast cancer. So I want to just put that out there. We've known each other a long time as well, both when you were a diplomat at the State Department.
But I come to you today, you know, expressing the anger of a lot of people --
BRINKER: Sure.
MITCHELL: Channeling through them, you see it on Twitter, you see it everywhere. And the fact is, a lot of people are tracing this back. My colleague, Lisa Myers, reporting last night on "Nightly News," a lot of people are tracing this back to what some found the surprising hiring of Karen Handel, who ran for governor. We've seen her statements and her strong support. She said when she was running for office, "I am staunchly and unequivocally pro-life. Let me be clear, since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood."
So, the question is, for a bipartisan organization such as yours, which has a broad-based advisory group, why hire a key staff person who is so strongly, fiercely identified against Planned Parenthood, one of your grantees?
BRINKER: Well, let me just for the record tell you, Karen did not have anything to do with this decision. This was decided at the board level and also by our mission, Andrea. Everything that we get up and do every day is about the mission. To provide women, vulnerable populations, with care, treatment, and screening.
And let me just take a step back for a minute. We are not defunding Planned Parenthood. We have three grants that will go on this year, and they will probably be eligible for the next grant cycle --
MITCHELL: But you've said that this is the one group out of 2,000 grantees, Planned Parenthood is the only group that comes under the rubric of this new policy, which is to not fund any organization that is under investigation. And their investigation, from Congressman Sterns, many believe is trumped up.
BRINKER: Well, but there are other investigations in states, number one. Two --
MITCHELL: They're always the target of an investigation. That's the way --
BRINKER: The investigation isn't the only issue, Andrea. In 2010, we set about creating excellence in our grants. Not just in our community grants, but in our science grants. Putting metrics, outcomes, and measures to them so that we can translate all of the science we funded over 30 years.
Now, part of that includes taking these grants into communities and being excellent grant givers. Many of the grants we were doing with Planned Parenthood do not meet new standards of criteria for how we can measure our results and effectiveness in communities. That is not to say that if they did meet those criteria, they would not be --
MITCHELL: Their supporters say they are the only ones that have been singled out among these thousands --
BRINKER: No, that's not true. That's not true.
MITCHELL: -- and that their grants for breast screening have nothing to do with any contraceptive or abortion counseling.
BRINKER: It's not --
MITCHELL: That they separate this funding completely.
BRINKER: The issue -- that's not the issue. Because that's not our issue. Our issue is grant excellence. They do pass-through grants with their screening grants. They send people to other facilities. We want to do more direct-service grants. You know, we contacted them in the fall, because we've been a longtime partner of Planned Parenthood, almost 20 years.
MITCHELL: I know.
BRINKER: We've given them over $9 million. Many of our grants worked for a long period of time.
This is not -- this is about the restructure of our grant program. Now, as an NGO and as a leader in the breast cancer space, we have an obligation to the community we serve, to donors, and to this country to translate cancer care in the way we know how.
MITCHELL: What do you do about the fact that donors are pulling back? Some people would say that -- I mean, the anger that's being expressed is going to hit you in the pocketbook. You have worked so hard to create a bipartisan organization. Look at your Facebook page. Your Facebook page has people cutting pink ribbons in half.
BRINKER: Well, Andrea --
MITCHELL: Your branding is at stake.
BRINKER: -- all I can tell you is that the responses we're getting are very, very favorable. People who have bothered to read the material, who have bothered to understand the issues -- again, we work for a mission, every day of our lives. And our job now is to translate cancer therapy into usable types of therapies that can be accessible for people --
MITCHELL: Aren't the most vulnerable women going to be affected by this? Planned Parenthood --
BRINKER: We are not giving less money in the communities where we're giving money. Let me just set the record straight: where we are giving money in these communities, we are not taking it back. We will, with some of them, go to direct service providers.
But we still have these grants in place with Planned Parenthood, in places where there aren't direct service providers, and they are good grants and they work with us.
But unless we have a way, again, to measure grants, to create metrics, outcomes in ways that we can say, this works in this community with this vulnerable population, this is what will work. These are the barriers, this is how it works. That is our only mission to cure breast cancer.
MITCHELL: Are you going to put out the evidence that you have that there's been anything flawed in the way they've delivered services to --
BRINKER: All we're doing is explaining, again, to our mission, what the criteria for new grants and community-based grants are, for our organization, for the time we are.
Many of the grants were education-oriented. We don't need to do that kind of education anymore. We've done it for 30 years. Now we need to translate this care into usable clinical care in communities. That means that if a person's screened, we need to follow. We need to follow-up the screening. Did something happen. Once they go through the Planned Parenthood program, they also have to come to us for additional therapy and care.
We are trying to advise our community grant program. And we're doing it, and they've been a longtime partner of ours. We've notified them of this change, and frankly, we've been very private about it. And we have not said that we won't accept grants who meet our criteria.
MITCHELL: Ambassador Nancy Brinker, thank you very much.
BRINKER: Thanks, Andrea.
MITCHELL: And now we are joined by Democratic senators Patty Murray of Washington and Barbara Boxer of California. Senator Murray, can you respond. From your information about Planned Parenthood, what is the flaw in the way they are providing services and what are you planning to do about it?
SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): Well, look, this is really a sad day for many of us who have been proud supporters of an organization whose mission has been to save women’s lives, who also know that Planned Parenthood’s mission is to save lives. And the tremendous work they do across this country in providing preventive services so women don’t miss out on their screenings for mammograms and diseases, cancer that can take their lives. So it’s a very sad day and Susan G. Komen has put in place a policy that says directly that they will not provide funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood because of a partisan witch hunt in the House against Planned Parenthood, an investigation. I would ask all the members of Susan G. Komen to reconsider that policy because it’s dangerous for women and it’s dangerous for organizations. If Susan G. Komen comes under partisan investigation here in Washington, DC, they are going to be in violation of their own policy altogether. So we’re putting out a letter along with Senator Lautenberg and 22 senators to ask them to reconsider this terrible decision.
MITCHELL: Senator Boxer, why don’t you speak out as well as to where you think we should go from here?
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-CA): Sure, I listened to everything Ambassador Brinker said and I have to say this is a complete revisionist comment that she’s making about why suddenly Planned Parenthood lost this funding. Which, by the way, has served 170,000 women over the past 5 years, giving them the absolutely life-saving screenings that they deserve to have. And, you know, if you just go back a day ago, two days ago, the official spokespeople for that organization, Susan G. Komen, said the reason was an investigation in the House. Well, could I say this. I was not born yesterday as most of your viewers can tell. And the fact is 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.’ What’s next? Are they going to attack the American Lung Association? The YMCA? The YWCA? This is so sad, as Patty Murray has so eloquently stated, because it’s about women’s health. And we do hope that they will reconsider. But to change the story is not going to work. People know what they said and this means that – unwittingly or wittingly – they’ve put themselves in the middle of a political witch hunt. And that is very very sad.
MITCHELL: Well, it's certainly troubling -- this whole debate is troubling for people on all sides of it. And Nancy Brinker is still here. Let me just ask you -- I know we're out of time, but is there any chance that you would respond to the senators and change the policy?
BRINKER: Well, yeah, I'm troubled that it's been labeled as political. This is not a political decision. We operate from one set of standards every day, and it is to our mission. And if we don't advance and revise and make grants that meet the mission and bring real care to vulnerable populations, we won't be doing our job. Again, these grants --
MITCHELL: I think there's a lot of communication --
BRINKER: There's a lot of communication –
MITCHELL: that needs to go back and forth --
BRINKER: -- that needs to go back and forth, you bet.
MITCHELL: We will follow up with you, the senators. Twenty-two senators have now signed that letter, and we will continue to report this story and there'll be more throughout the day on NBC and MSNBC as well. And we'll be right back.
Leave a Comment:
I'm finished with the Susan B. Komen Foundation.
Ms. Brinker can sit there and deny it all she wants - I'm not buying what she is selling!
With all these Congressional witch hunts... what's next?
Dunking women to see if their witches?
Playing politics with the health of disadvantaged women is beyond disgusting & they should lose their tax exempt status for starters.
Made my donation today directly to; Planned Parenthood & will continue to do so monthly!
Me too, Feisty.
Consider this, all of you businesses that are involved in the Pink Ribbon campaign, I will not buy your products.
Ditto what my friend NDD said!
I know you are not on FB - but you should see the SBK page & all the pink ribbons that have been CUT IN HALF!
Dr. Kathy Plesser, a Manhattan radiologist on the medical advisory board of Susan G. Komen for the Cure's New York chapter, said she plans to resign from her position unless Komen reverses its decision to pull grant money from Planned Parenthood.
"I’m a physician and my interest is women’s health, and I am disturbed by Komen’s decision because I am a very strong advocate for serving under-served women eliminating this funding will mean there’s no place for these women to go. Where are these women to go to have a mammography? Do they not deserve to have mammography?"
With her decision, Plesser joins Komen's top public health official, Mollie Williams, and the executive director of Komen's Los Angeles County chapter, Deb Anthony, both of whom also resigned in protest.
Excellent Feisty and Dennis!
I truly expected that Ms. Brinker would come on with Andrea and pull back or say they will reconsider the policy or somehow try to defuse the situation. Instead, she doubles down on the de-funding and then tries to lie about it in the next statement. Geesh.
As the sister and aunt of breast cancer survivors and a volunteer at our Race for the Cure, I was glad that the SGK Foundation was bi-partisan and represented all women everywhere in the fight against this horrible disease. I see now that I was wrong. I will no longer be supporting the Foundation with my money or my time.
Any woman that is a part of the republican party is voting against themselves... There is a war on woman's rights from within the republican party...
I don't know why all these old republican men want to tell women what the can and can not do with their bodies... Whatever happened to smaller government?
At this point, I'd say the ONLY thing that will save this foundatin is if there is a FULL repudiation of this action, AND, ALL the people involved in this decion, INCLUDING Nancy Brinker, immediately resign and turn the organization over to a caretaker group until it can be reorganized.
Short of that, in year they will be little more than a small rightwing anti-abortion agitprop group.
Never a good idea to mix business and politics. SGK has only guaranteed that half of their funding will disappear. I predict the resignation of several senior managers, but it might already be too little, too late.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
I'm a 70 year old male in Olympia, WA. very much in agreement with you...
This goes deeper, IMHO, then SGK... The Radical Evangelicals and Conservative(?) Republicans claim Christianity is under attack... IMHO, the USA is under attack by Radical Evangelical Christians attempting to take over and implement CONTROL over USA Citizens... I'm also skeptical of Tea Party controlling Republicans... Seems to me Extremist Republicans are likely using the Tea Party as scapegoats for their Radical agenda....
IMHO most Christians go about their DAILY Living and do so with NO Political agenda in mind. Abortion is a MEDICAL PROCEDURE, not a Political, or Religious procedure... WE the PEOPLE need to get our so called Representatives to start moving those Political Religious Organization into a Taxable status... They will whine and play the under attack/ victim role, but Religion needs to be PRIVATE and NOT Political...
The First Amendment (From WIKI )
In the United States, the religious civil liberties are guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:
This is such a one sided interview it's ridiculous. Mitchell didn't even give her an opportunity to say anything. This interview says and reveals nothing other than how Andrea Mitchell personally feels about the situation. Talk about politicized. MSNBC, you are truly failing in your ability to report facts and do so evenhandedly. Shame on you and shame on you, Andrea Mitchell for letting your personal opinions and convictions get in the way of the facts and your ability to report truth!
LarBear,
Thank you for your support & feedback from the other side of the aisle (so to speak)! ;o)
Mom:
You probably don't remember this, since it's become an unfortunate anachronism with the 24 hour news cycle, but what you saw was formerly known as "journalism." It's the practice of asking tough questions in an interview, and probing beyond talking points by following up on answers that don't provide answers. It's actually a way to dig through the debris to find the truth that the subject is busily obscuring.
I'm pretty sure Brinker expected a one sided interview. She just thought it would be her side. Imagine her surprise.
But hey, if all journalists would confront the politicians and celebrities they interview like Mitchell did, we'd all be better off for it.
I will concede that Mitchell has "personal opinions and convictions." We all do; hers may well be a result of the fact she is herself a breast cancer survivor. But did those opinions/convictions get in the way of "facts" and "truth?" Hardly.
Andrea Mitchell got in the way of the Komen SPIN MACHINE. Brinker didn't explain why Komen changed the story from the "investigation" issue to the "grant procedure changes" issue. Brinker, when given the chance, didn't name a single other organization affected by the "grant procedure" change.
Brinker was interviewed. It was NOT a press conference where she could read a statement. She knew she'd be asked questions; she was stunningly unprepared to answer even the obvious ones.
In short, your outrage is misplaced. You should be asking why Brinker was letting her personal opinions and convictions get in the way of the truth.
why is a cancer foundation involved with planned parenthood?
Because PP does women's health care, including breast exams, mammogram referrals, and followup? Uh...yeah..that would be it.
cAncer screening And PrevenTion — 14.5 PercenT oF services in 2010
Pap Tests
HPV Vaccinations
Breast Exams/ Breast Care Colposcopy Procedures*** LOOP/LEEP Procedures*** Cryotherapy Procedures***
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PP_Services.pdf
Why is it that the progressive's version of tolerance includes everyone EXCEPT Christians? I have belonged to numerous Christian communities over the years, none of which have exemplified the nasty descriptions of Christians outlined in these comments. This Komen debacle is NOT a "Christian" issue and yet the Christian haters have all come out claiming that somehow Komen's decision was the fault of America's Christian population. Basically, Christian haters use every social issue that fails to go their way to defame Christian believers. So, apparently, since Christians are such a vile and terrible evil in this world, why don't you take that conclusion to its natural end and have every one of them imprisoned for their beliefs? It happens in other countries, where religion is not allowed to be freely practiced. Then the world can relive another kind of Holocaust, the notion of tolerance can be eradicated from America's set of values and America can be the kind of "Christian Free Utopia" that all the haters long for it to be. The world is a very dangerous place when opposing voices are silenced and one group is held responsible for all of the wrongs in this world. This Komen issue had nothing to do with Christianity but radical haters have tried to make that link.
stopfeigningoutrage
nope, you are wrong. this isn't christian bashing,...this is the perception that Handle (an officer in the Komen organization with a STATED agenda of abolishing Planned Parenthood) designed a new 'policy' that would exclude one grantee and one only - Planned Parenthood. some will say it was incidental and many of the rest of us believe it was politically motivated. If your organization's mission statement is to protect the lives and health of WOMEN,...abolishing restricted funds for cancer screenings and education seems a littlel,...counter intuitive.
Planned Parenthood provides WAY more than family planning services and significantly more than abortions. But you can't tell a hard righter that,...it doesn't compute in their pre-programmed pea brains. Or so it would appear,...
stopfeigning:
Please cite anything in any of my posts that is "christian bashing." Seriously. I need to know exactly what I've said that has so offended you.
Or...perhaps you're just venting?
I hear the sides and I can't help but feel that the right conservative pressure has influenced the singling out of Planned Parenthood. Read the transcript...tough process, and Andrea Mitchell should be commended for pushing it to an intense but politically polite limit. This obviously isn't going away, and some marketing rebranding effort will fall flat. Shame...TkS
Women all over the hospital my husband works at have been trashing all the pink ribbons, t-shirts, etc. At the imagining center part of the hospital the name "Komen" is now considered a curse word.
This is truly a time for all women to mourn. And fight.
It used to be bipartisan. That was part of it's strength and what made it such a trusted organization.
They messed up.
I have tried to get on the Komen website all afternoon. It comes up server busy, or nothing comes up at all. The web address is ww5.komen.org I was trying to get on to register my displeasure. Guess a lot of other folks are too!
This will really hurt them, Everyone I know or my wife knows will never give to the Koman foundation again. My guess is that Komans back down when they see the full backlash.
Too late to undo the revelation that the foundation is a stooge for the right wing kooks. It would be as constructive as telling the jury to ignore that last comment.
I have always thought that if the Koman Foundation were really, truly interested in seeing an end to breast cancer, their first priority would be to make sure that ALL women were able to receive the necessary testing for detection-whether rich or poor, with insurance or without. I have long been uncomfortable with the amounts of money they have been raising.
It's the foundations money they can do with it what they want. That's what's wrong in this country everyone is to busy trying to tell everyone else what they can and can not do instead of taking care of their own lives.
Bloomberg just donated $250K and it's my understanding that there has been over $450K in other donations which make up the lose from the Koman Foundation.
sfcret:
It's about integrity and courage as well as money. Komen can no longer claim to have the first two qualities, and they've made a bad decision about the money.
Free market, right? People can vote with their feet. I know I will. I'm very upset about this.
Ms. Mitchell, I saw the interview today and you stood up for women against Ms. Brinker's spin. Wow! Good for you and women everywhere. You are a heroine..an honest-to-god heroine for American women everywhere and I thank you.
The fact that Brinker stated they have revised their grant guidelines because they are "Putting metrics, outcomes, and measures to them so that we can translate all of the science we funded over 30 years" is a farse! I've written grants for well over 15 years and if anyone can present Komen with goals, measures and outcomes, it would be Planned Parenthood! Where she made her comment with surgical precision is where she said they were going to give to direct service providers in the community. This is a very fine point to allow SGK to get around defunding PP. And it's a croc!
It's a bit odd that the knee-jerk reaction is to try to kill the Komen foundation, which does tremendous breast cancer prevention work.
Given the dubious methods of Planned Parenthood and the pending investigation, why is it so unreasonable to directly fund underserved communities of women. When PP disperses the money it is not directly targeted at breast cancer. Seems like a simple change in business model and a bid for more legitimate uses of funds...it is sad to see everyone politicizing and trying to attack the bipartisan Komen foundation that works on behalf of women, not on behalf of a monolithic abortion-driven agenda.
Ambassador Brinker (served W in Hungary and then in his administration) and her new hire Handel are Republican stooges.
Free Market says when someone changes a policy that affects only ONE grantee,...chances are - that isn't 'accidental'. And when a 'bi-partisan' non profit organization decides to target an organization that is already on a Republican 'watch' list and then the reason changes within 24 hours,...well,...
that smacks of politicizing. When a non for profit dabbles in politics,...they should have their Tax Exempt status revoked. But, hey, I'm all for taking my donations and putting them where I think they can do the most good. I no longer trust this organization. And if that isn't a BRANDING problem,...there should be some new jobs available in the PR and Marketing departments at Komen Headquarters.
PS. your ignorance of the RANGE of services provided by Planned Parenthood is not surprising.
They have stopped stem cell research, also. The timeline on all of this is telling.
I guess my point is that the backlash seems a bit silly and overdramatized. Last year Komen gave over $283MM in "program services". It's a serious, major organization that is doing tremendous things for women everywhere.
They must really give a lot of money to Planned Parenthood to merit this huge firestorm of criticism, right? Well, no. Less than 700K goes to Planned Parenthood, an organization that spent $860MM on program services last year.
The $700K is a tiny tiny drop in the bucket to both organizations, and Komen has stated they want to give directly. They have cut off only one organization, but how many massive organizations are there that give $860MM in program services and in no way depend on this money?? There are not a lot of major foundations that give their grants directly to even larger institutions, and this decision seems to be grounded in reality.
Planned Parenthood's politicizing this normal course of business decision, and more importantly, the knee-jerk reactions of many of the comments on this thread, senators, Andrea Mitchell, newsmakers etc is the latest example of the nasty politics that is engaged by both the left and right.
Komen has always stayed above the fray as a pro-woman, non-political organization. They never would've done this if they knew the silliness and outrage that would result from reassigning 0.2% of their program services budget, which made up 0.08% of Planned Parenthood's program budget. Komen demonstrated they are the adults in the room today by reversing the decision in the face of shrill partisan outcry.
Tiger:
Uh...no. Actually they would have done it anyway. They knew it would be controversial. But they did it anyway.
Time to stand up to these Evangelical Baptist mullahs. I will not call them Christian. Komen/Brinker is a tool of the right wing religious zealots. I have been very close to cancer victims and I consider myself a Christian. Komen/Brinker is destructive to both.
Not a penny, kopeck, pfennig, farthing, won, yen or centavo to these sicko bast*rds.
Its their money, they can donate to whom they want. If you don't like it don't donate to them. SGK foundation has no mandate that they must donate to Planned Parenthood. This is just a plot by the left to demonize someone they disagree with.
Wrong, janet, but as we have seen from research, conservatives aren't too bright.
The politicizing was done by the Komen Foundation. They demonized an organization, Planned Parenthood, which serves poor women. If they had true interest in breast health, they would fund organizations that were involved in that.
The backlash will be great.
Janet
Please explain what demonizing plot the left is hatching. I am not aware of any coordinated action by the usual suspects.
Its Monday now. I'm guessing Janet is unable to back up her accusation of a left wing plot with any sliver of fact.
Day to day after day. The onslaught of attacks against the health of women and children keeps coming. Unless you are filthy rich, of course. I think we have all had enough.
With the Republicans previous attemps to decrease or defund, WIC, Medicaid, school lunch programs and now their investigation of an organization which provides screening for cervical cancer as well, their supporters can no longer make the claim of being "Pro-life".
Almost 1/3 of the woman in this country get their antipartum and postpartum care paid for through Medicaid programs, and almost 1/2 of those women are employed, some with large companies such as Pepsico, Walmart and Kelley Services.
It is not their money, get it, they raised it from all of us, Kormen/Brinker does not print money or have a factory or investment bank that has to trade for her to use the profit made to finance breast cancer examinations and does not have the right to dictate to us or other women what they can do with their bodies. She raises this money pure and simple as a none profit and none political affiliation so she must stay clear of partisan politics and their partisan issues. She is cooked.
How sad that SBK reversed their decision, but at least many now know about the link between abortion and breast cancer. One commentator suggested an alternative to SBK. Why not support a group that helps women during a crisis pregnancy while speaking the truth about the risks of abortion? One such group is Gateway Pregnancy Center, 960 Springfield Avenue, Irvington, NJ 07111. For the past quarter century Gateway has been providing FREE life-affirming services to over 26,000 women. Helping women, speaking the truth and sharing the gospel. dean@gateway.org
Contribute directly and charitably to the Planned Parenthood Agency as is your absolute right and privelege. If you believe that they offer worthwhile services to those in need, by all means, knock your socks off and support the hell out of them. Unfortunately, the Komen foundation is associated in the public eye most specifically with Breast Cancer Research and finding a cure. Across the country there are three day walks to raise funds to "find the cure" and the entrance doesn't come cheaply at all. I know folks who have chosen to participate in the walks and had to run fundraisers in the community to come up with the required registration fee for the privelege of walking 60 miles. All of that is wonderful and laudable, and wow, I admire the spirit of everyone supporting that. What seems to be the real crux here is probably that many, many of the participants were not even aware that the foundation offered assistance to Planned Parenthood. Many, many people object to Planned Parenthood and the foundation has to be sensitive to the fact that these very dedicated supporters don't want to be forced to support something indirectly through their support of the Komen foundation. What is probably the saddest part of this whole fiasco is that after a couple of high profile political types get up and spout off about women's right to choose etc, the foundation, it appears from more recent news items, has caved in and reversed their decision...in essence, they have made themselves political instead of adhereing to their support base, and remaining what they have been, which is a private, not for profit, foundation working for a cure to breast cancer. Would you contribute to the lung cancer society if you know that it offered assistance to cigarette manufacturers or better still, it supported asbestos manufacturers? Up until this news, Komen stood for breast cancer research, treatment, cures in the minds of most Americans. Most did not know that they were supporting other agencies, perhaps not so proper to their moral convictions, through grants made by one foundation to another. If the main concern is offering important medical screening to those who can least afford it, why must it be through Planned parenthood centers? Certainly other facilities could be endowed that would offer the same screenings for the foundation grant. And in the interest of further cancer research and cure, it would even be appropriate for the Komen foundation to set up its own screening facilities for mammograms and other cancer screenings within communities with a high percentage of need.
Here's a blog post I read yesterday that is quite eye-opening about the SGK foundation. I had read similar information awhile back but this is much more comprehensive: 2011/10/22/ i-will-not-be-pinkwashed-wh y-i-do-not-support-susan-g -komen-for-the-cure/
Here's a blog post I read yesterday that is quite eye-opening about the SGK foundation. I had read similar information awhile back but this is much more comprehensive:
ChickaBOOMer| MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell: Ratings Abortion
It isn't even about the amount that the Susan G Komen For The Cure foundation donates - it's about the moral support. It's about having someone as big as SGK behind you every step of the way. When they state wthey will no longer be funding you, for such dubious reasons as a partisan, anti-choice witch hunt, it's a huge slap in the face. Would it have tremendously hurt Planned Parenthood financially? Maybe not, but pulling funding says that you think they're doing something wrong, and that CAN be hurtful. Luckily, the supporters of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America are not so easily swayed, and have spoken with their postings - and their wallets. Here's to hoping the Susan G. Komen For the Cure foundation wakes up and realizes it's playing politics with women's lives.