T Nation

Women's Lives Before Politics


http://pol.moveon.org/komen/?rc=pac_komen_letter.t0.fb.v1.g0 <

Susan G. Komen for the Cure just cut funding to Planned Parenthood for breast health screenings, bowing to anti-choice pressure and making breast health care suddenly inaccessible to many women.


They are still donating the money, just not to planned parenthood for future grants (not current). Are you claiming that what they end up spending their money on isn't a worthy cause?


It's impossible to tell from that video. She's a spokeswoman- that video was made to gain back support and improve public image. It gave no exact information about anything and was about equivalent to any politician saying "trust me, I am going to be awesome" without telling you one specific about what he plans to do.


That's because only criteria has changed so far, grants haven't. Current grants aren't affected. But again, all the money is still going to be donated. Are you claiming that changes made are going to give funds to less worthy causes?


Basically, if you want your money to go to PP, then give it to them. Attacking and trying to de-fund a charity donating millions to women's health just seems dumb.


It's clever marketing and always has been - bundle abortion services with all sorts of other unrelated women's health services, and then when someone raises an objection to abortion - which is unlike any of the other services - cry foul when someone has an objection to the presence of abortion services and contrive an "you hate women because you're denying all these other important services to women!" argument.

It's silly, and no one falls for it. Planned Parenthood could easily provide all of these other unrelated women's health services without abortion services, and women would be get all treatment they need under the same funding/arrangement.

I suspect the dollars from Susan Komen will be diverted into other organizations that simply provide these other services (there's no shortage to choose from), so there won't be an interruption in treatment from the funding provided by this organization.

The politics, as it were, is totally on the side of the pro-choice movement in this instance. Trying to guilt people into support by intentionally refusing to partition out the services. It's expolitative of women, and always has been. Seriously - holding cancer treatment and pap smears hostage for political reasons on a claim that women are going to be harmed by it.

Shame on you, and shame on all of them.


I answered this. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL FROM THAT VIDEO; it's POSSIBLE that they will go to less worthy causes. I can't think of another program in existence in the US that's as wide-spread and well-established as Planned Parenthood that also performs these procedures at a reduced cost for as many women.


So you basically have no idea how anything will be affected, but you are signing a petition against what you don't know?

I'm not saying that you can tell where the money is going to go from that video. But so what if they spend the money on breast cancer research instead of mammograms?

And there are plenty of charities that provide those services.

Not to mention, the standards for the grants are changing, which doesn't automatically defund PP unless they fail or refuse to meet the standards. It isn't SBA's job to tailor the standards so a particular charity gets funds, if anything, it's the charities job to meet those standards if it wants the money.

I'll sign a petition to try and get PP to meet the standards and get the money if you want. But I'm not going to attack a charity that does so much for women.


Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit, meaning that any donation dollars given can be assigned a purpose by the donator and then organization receiving the donation is required by law to use the donation only for that. This means that a donation to planned parenthood by Susan B Komen could easily be restricted to breast-cancer only services. In fact, I would be highly surprised if that wasn't the case with the current grants. However, the general public tends to be unaware of how non-profit grants work and only sees that one organization is donating to an organization they disprove of. Educating the public is much more difficult than just doing a quick apology to regain approval.

So if you care about the services Planned Parenthood offers, sign the petition. If you just see Planned Parenthood=Abortion, argue in this thread :slightly_smiling:


I'm interested in these charities. What are their names and how many people do they effect compared with Planned Parenthood?


Doesn't matter - it's the shameless political exploitation that is the problem. The foundation is withholding funds because PP is under Congressional investigation. Instead of PP proponents saying, "we'll be vindicated", they start screaming from the rooftops that if you don't support PP, you want women to be sick.

PP isn't entitled to a dime of the foundation's money, and if the foundation decided to put its dollars elsewhere, another outfit not named PP would provide all the same services that PP provides... and maybe more.

PP just wants to use the "bundling" argument for political gain. No more, no less.

I don't partcularly care about the services Planned Parenthood offers as they related to Planned Parenthood, because these services are offered by tons of other organizations. It's not as though women have Planned Parenthood or no option at all. Ridiculous. But that's the false scenario that pro-choice advocates try to pull over the public's eyes.

Guess what, it's not working.


Susan G Komen can do whatever they want with their own money as far as I'm concerned.

I especially lol'd at the part where the article tells Susan G Komen to "put lives before politics".


What other organizations are these services offered by and how many women have access to them in comparison with Planned Parenthood?

I can tell you than in the town where I currently live, Planned Parenthood is the ONLY place where a woman can receive affordable basic procedures. This is the case for a several hundred mile radius in all directions.


But donation to specifically those services would free up other funds for abortion services, no?

If a person actually considers abortion to be the death of a child, how can any good they do make up for that? If a charity practiced what you considered murder would you want to give them money? Even if that murdering they did was a really small part of their services?

I think a lot of times Pro-abortion folks have a hard time seeing the other side of the argument. If you feel that, morally, abortion is murder, it tends to be a pretty significant issue when it happens. I understand that you may only view it as a medical procedure; I'm not arguing who's right. I'm just trying to get you to recognize the other viewpoint.

Just out of curiosity, how much have you given to SGK?


Uh, last I checked, the amount of money you have directly impact the number of people you can affect. If the money is given to someone else, odds are, they can start helping more people. That is kind of the point of the whole funding issue.


You mean other than hospitals, hospital affiliates, individual doctors, oncology and neurology specialists, ambulatory surgery centers (single and multi-specialty), and other non-profits?

Is this a joke?


So in other words, there is no other organization that you can think of which comes close to effecting as many women and you would recommend trying to expand a grass-roots nonprofit to the same size?


No, this is NOT a joke. Hospitals etc MAY reduce charges for low-income patients, but they always refer patients to Planned Parenthood because they cannot offer those specific services for as reduced a fee, even after other funding programs have been exhausted.

If you doubt this, send a friend to a regular gynecologist without insurance and see what happens. It will work even better if the friend is between the ages of 17-20.


Why are you insisting that the structure be the same? why only one organization? Why a non-profit? why those specific services? What are the numbers with saving lives? Are these mammograms saving women? could more women be saved using that money for other things? Are mammograms effective at detecting cancer in a way that saves people?

Based on what I've read with recent changes to guidelines, mammograms don't work very well.

But comparing the effectiveness of PP with the funds to others without those funds makes no sense.


And if grants were given to the hospitals to preform the service free of charge....?