Komen Disgraces Its Own Cause
Call it Planned Parenthood's war on choice. In less time than it takes to scald a child to death with a saline injection into the womb, the rabid pro-abortion lobby descended like vultures upon the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation. The Komen crime? They dared exercise their right to choose when it came to who would receive their donations and funding.
The relationship between Komen and the abortion mill has always been baffling on several levels. Komen was started to find ways to save the sick and suffering. Planned Parenthood began as an organization based upon the Margaret Sanger lie of eugenics, which taught that weaker beings should be exterminated. Komen exists upon the fundamental concept that all life is valuable. Planned Parenthood exists upon the fundamental deceit that only "wanted" or "convenient" life is worthy of protection. Komen's answer to social problems is to strive to find ways to support the living. Planned Parenthood's answer to social problems is to increase access to killing procedures.
And then there's the abortion-breast cancer link, which leaves a rational mind boggled as to why an abortion provider would ever receive funding from an organization fighting breast cancer. While pro-abortion activists rail that any supposed link between the two is debunked, that just isn't true.
Planned Parenthood claims that the National Cancer Institute officially denied abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer in their 2003 conference. But what PP conveniently neglects to mention is that the decision to do so was purely political and was accompanied by many dissenting voices, like Joel Brind of Baruch College. Brind, a Ph.D. endocrinologist in New York City, complains that the conference "refused to allow attending scientists to present the opposing position of the scientific research establishing the link, showing that abortion was declassified as a cancer risk for political and not scientific reasons." They also ignore the inconvenient fact that the NCI's lead researcher has now completely retreated from her position.
Darrell Birkey, the research director for American Right to Life, confirms, "Louise A. Brinton was largely responsible for getting the government-funded NCI to deny the abortion-breast cancer link ... she has now reversed herself and co-authored a study which includes 'induced abortion' as a significant breast cancer risk factor."
These facts alone, far more than any Republican investigation of Planned Parenthood's sleazy business practices (could you honestly expect anything less from an organization whose annual profit margins are directly tied to the number of children they killed that year?), is what should prompt Komen not only to yank Planned Parenthood's funding, but also to publicly declare Planned Parenthood an enemy to the Komen cause.
But instead, just three days after publicly announcing their decision to stop accepting grant applications from an organization that has facilitated the murder of nearly 25 million future American women and maimed thousands of others, Susan G. Komen for the Cure founder Nancy Brinker announced their reversal. "We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons," she explained. Apparently she and the Komen board of directors are not distressed by the obvious awareness that this second change was done for political reasons.
To call this turn of events bizarre is an epic understatement. Komen's original decision to affirm life by denying grants to a killing machine was not met with a negative public backlash. Much the opposite: after severing ties with Planned Parenthood, Brinker confirmed that support for Komen had skyrocketed in the 48 hours that followed. "Our donations are up 100 percent in the past two days," she reported.
For their part, Planned Parenthood used the controversy to extort $400,000 from their supporters and to flex their political muscles in a public bullying crusade that folded Komen's weak spine in record time. The queen of abortion, Cecile Richards, bragged that it was the "compassionate outcry in support of those most in need" that had brought Planned Parenthood victory.
It's safe to say that "those most in need" are not the vulnerable baby girls in the womb threatened by an organization that regards them as less than human. Of course, it's also not teenage girls who are manipulated into choosing to kill the life within them by an organization that intentionally avoids telling them the grave risks involved. And it's not the countless adult women who are left alone with haunting dreams and the emotional trauma of abortion by an organization that used them for profit. And since Planned Parenthood doesn't even do mammograms, it can't be poor women looking for cheap cancer screenings. So who are "those most in need"?
The answer is all those who have come into contact with the false prophets of "choice." Shame on Komen for disgracing its cause by empowering the evil of Planned Parenthood.