Breast-cancer victims are only the latest hostages taken by Planned Parenthood. Unless the organization is finally held to account, they will surely not be the last.
Some parts of the US army are under criminal investigation at any given time (think units accused of raping, murder etc). Do we withdrawal support to the US army because of these cases? Of course not.
But a larger question is- providing breast examinations to some women who visit PP centers saves lives and has saved lives- so why are supposedly you and other 'pro-life' people so aghast that ? Or perhaps you are one of those 'pro-life' people who also supports the death penalty (Jesus doesn't distinguish - a life is a life) in which case you are anti-abortion, not pro life.
Look, this has been a PR disaster for the pro-life movement, i understand its a bitter pill to swallow- but at the end of the day, PP providing breast exams will save lives.
"Do we withdrawal support to the US army because of these cases?"
We support the army because it's in the Constitution, which explicitly provides for a federal military as our means of collective defense, whether we 'like' the army or not.
"providing breast examinations to some women who visit PP centers"
Claiming that you provide "breast exams" without having the capacity to perform a mammogram is the equivalent of claiming that I provide "auto maintenance" by looking at your car and suggesting that you visit a mechanic.
Actually you're way off base here. A manual breast exam is the first step in the universally accepted medical protocol for breast cancer screening. Similar to ANY primary care practice, PP performs the manual exam in-house and refers patients to an imaging facility for mammography. The results are interpreted by the referring physician (from PP in this case), who then advises the patient. The "middle-man" argument holds no water, period.
Opposition to Komen money going to Planned Parenthood is not against "saving lives" but against the inefficient use of money. PP is a money-making AND taxpayer-supported AND charity-supported organization with a budget much larger than Komen. Komen is giving grants to help offset the cost of mammograms -- very expensive -- which PP doesn't do. With its massive resources, PP can certainly afford the minimal cost of feeling breasts, telling women to feel breasts, and telling women where to go for mammograms without Komen's money; Komen's much smaller amount of resources would be better spent actually helping to pay for mammograms.
I disagree this has been a PR disaster for the pro-life movement, as everybody currently complaining about pro-lifers in this story already didn't like them. It has been a PR disaster for the Komen folks, though; by changing their story and changing their stand, they have managed to anger people on both sides of this argument. That's got to be a pretty rare achievement, and it's not good for them at all.
It's difficult to understand why any reasonable person would believe that charitable dollars for breast cancer screenings are best spent at abortion clinics. Since there is only so much money to go around to detect and treat breast cancer, why distribute one penny of those limited funds to clinics that focus on taking lives, not saving them? Referencing women's healthcare is a convenient cover PP created to direct dollars intended for other purposes to its abortion business and explains why PP adamantly refuses to separate its women's healthcare business from its abortion business even though that refusal results in the loss of contributions from many organizations that fund women's healthcare services, but not abortions.
PP's ugly behavior proves there's much more at stake here than money. By co-mingling resources, PP can also co-mingle contributions without detection and manipulate the statistics to support its claim that it performs very few abortions in comparison to other women's healthcare services, statistics which prove to be false more often than not. How clever to perform a breast exam and other routine medical procedures on each woman who comes to the clinic for a pregnancy test and/or abortion and then claim most of the services it provides are women's healthcare services, not abortions. Komen determined that it's money could be put to better use elsewhere - a decision it had every right to make - but PP and the in-your-face abortion advocates had other ideas. While PP might feel victorious at the moment, both it and Komen have been irrevocably damaged by this PR nightmare.
Jenna, it's difficult to understand propaganda like yours when you say that PP clinics "focus on taking lives" as if the majority of PP services were abortions.
Some parts of the US army are under criminal investigation at any given time (think units accused of raping, murder etc). Do we withdrawal support to the US army because of these cases? Of course not.
But a larger question is- providing breast examinations to some women who visit PP centers saves lives and has saved lives- so why are supposedly you and other 'pro-life' people so aghast that ? Or perhaps you are one of those 'pro-life' people who also supports the death penalty (Jesus doesn't distinguish - a life is a life) in which case you are anti-abortion, not pro life.
Look, this has been a PR disaster for the pro-life movement, i understand its a bitter pill to swallow- but at the end of the day, PP providing breast exams will save lives.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Do we withdrawal support to the US army because of these cases?"
We support the army because it's in the Constitution, which explicitly provides for a federal military as our means of collective defense, whether we 'like' the army or not.
"providing breast examinations to some women who visit PP centers"
Claiming that you provide "breast exams" without having the capacity to perform a mammogram is the equivalent of claiming that I provide "auto maintenance" by looking at your car and suggesting that you visit a mechanic.
You know the truth, just stop lying to yourself.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseActually you're way off base here. A manual breast exam is the first step in the universally accepted medical protocol for breast cancer screening. Similar to ANY primary care practice, PP performs the manual exam in-house and refers patients to an imaging facility for mammography. The results are interpreted by the referring physician (from PP in this case), who then advises the patient. The "middle-man" argument holds no water, period.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOpposition to Komen money going to Planned Parenthood is not against "saving lives" but against the inefficient use of money. PP is a money-making AND taxpayer-supported AND charity-supported organization with a budget much larger than Komen. Komen is giving grants to help offset the cost of mammograms -- very expensive -- which PP doesn't do. With its massive resources, PP can certainly afford the minimal cost of feeling breasts, telling women to feel breasts, and telling women where to go for mammograms without Komen's money; Komen's much smaller amount of resources would be better spent actually helping to pay for mammograms.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI disagree this has been a PR disaster for the pro-life movement, as everybody currently complaining about pro-lifers in this story already didn't like them. It has been a PR disaster for the Komen folks, though; by changing their story and changing their stand, they have managed to anger people on both sides of this argument. That's got to be a pretty rare achievement, and it's not good for them at all.
This is a reply to ExpatAsia; I don't know why it didn't thread as one.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's difficult to understand why any reasonable person would believe that charitable dollars for breast cancer screenings are best spent at abortion clinics. Since there is only so much money to go around to detect and treat breast cancer, why distribute one penny of those limited funds to clinics that focus on taking lives, not saving them? Referencing women's healthcare is a convenient cover PP created to direct dollars intended for other purposes to its abortion business and explains why PP adamantly refuses to separate its women's healthcare business from its abortion business even though that refusal results in the loss of contributions from many organizations that fund women's healthcare services, but not abortions.
PP's ugly behavior proves there's much more at stake here than money. By co-mingling resources, PP can also co-mingle contributions without detection and manipulate the statistics to support its claim that it performs very few abortions in comparison to other women's healthcare services, statistics which prove to be false more often than not. How clever to perform a breast exam and other routine medical procedures on each woman who comes to the clinic for a pregnancy test and/or abortion and then claim most of the services it provides are women's healthcare services, not abortions. Komen determined that it's money could be put to better use elsewhere - a decision it had every right to make - but PP and the in-your-face abortion advocates had other ideas. While PP might feel victorious at the moment, both it and Komen have been irrevocably damaged by this PR nightmare.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJenna, it's difficult to understand propaganda like yours when you say that PP clinics "focus on taking lives" as if the majority of PP services were abortions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse