Planned Parenthood Shows That Bullying Works

The Susan G Komen foundation has reversed it’s decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood while it was under investigation of misusing federal funds due to the social network outcry after Planned Parenthood started the story that the funding cut was over the issue of abortion. So many people were upset that Planned Parenthood received more money in extra donations than they were expected to receive from Komen this year.

This just goes to show that bullying does happen, but it only gets called bullying when people are trying to prevent abortion.

It really should not bother me as I know this is how the world works. We try to conceptualize what is fair and right, but that doesn’t not always align with how others see a situation. Here, anti-abortion means a loss of freedom. The money going to Planned Parenthood was for breast exams and not abortions, so the freedom to get an abortion was not really in jeopardy.

I understand that an anti-abortion group claims that Planned Parenthood misused federal funds. I understand how someone in Congress decided to investigate. I could say that Planned Parenthood could stop performing abortions in order to keep providing low cost health care to those without insurance or the means to obtain it else where. Since the abortions that are provided by PP are not to save the life of the mother, as that would occur in the hospital, the service is not a preventative medical procedure as the breast exams are.

Women have the right to have abortions and should retain that right. That is not the issue here, as I see it at least. This is about an organization cutting ties with another organization while they are undergoing federal scrutiny. This should never have been about an issue of abortion, but it is easier to get people to rally behind you when you distract them from the truth.



Filed under Misc, Politics

2 responses to “Planned Parenthood Shows That Bullying Works

  1. From Jezebel:

    The Susan G. Komen Foundation’s official line is that they didn’t end their relationship with Planned Parenthood in response to relentless bullying from pro-life groups, but because the family planning organization is currently under investigation by Congress. They have a rule, you see, that bars them from contributing to organizations that are under investigation at the local, state, or federal level.

    Interestingly, this brand new rule that suddenly appeared in the books of the Komen Foundation just so happened to coincide with a Congressional investigation launched by a Republican legislator, who himself was pressured by the pro-life group Americans United for Life. And last year’s assault on Planned Parenthood also coincided with the addition of a vocally anti-abortion ex-politician to the ranks of Susan G Komen For the Cure.

    Karen Handel, who was endorsed by Sarah Palin during her unsuccessful bid for governor of Georgia in 2010, has been the Foundation’s Senior Vice President for Public Policy since April 2011. During her gubernatorial candidacy, she ran on an anti-choice platform, vowing that if elected, she’d defund Planned Parenthood. Handel wrote on her campaign blog,

    I will be a pro-life governor who will work tirelessly to promote a culture of life in Georgia…. I believe that each and every unborn child has inherent dignity, that every abortion is a tragedy, and that government has a role, along with the faith community, in encouraging women to choose life in even the most difficult of circumstances…. since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood.

    She even promised to eliminate funding for breast and cervical cancer screenings provided by the organization.

    How curious! A person with what looks like a personal vendetta against Planned Parenthood joins the ranks of an organization that provides funding to Planned Parenthood, and soon, that organization “defunds” Planned Parenthood. But surely this couldn’t be about Handel’s personal feelings. According to Komen, this is about rule following. Protocol.


    • I get it and it does seem to be a bit more than just coincidences, but what is in it for the Komen foundation?

      Handel has held that position for almost a year and the new policy was not announced until the beginning of the new calendar year and before the fiscal year ended, as the changes would go into effect with the next fiscal year. Even if she was wanting to drop funding from Planned Parenthood, she would still have needed to convince the rest of the upper management and board that it was the correct decision. There is a lot of conspiracy theories with many people who would have had to have been responsible for this one woman to launch her evil agenda against Planned Parenthood. Not many of the news organizations mention the fact that in 2005 she approved supporting Planned Parenthood because of the breast and cervical screenings that they perform.

      I don’t see Planned Parenthood saying anything about the fact that a federal task force has advised that the number of breast screenings should be cut back as it often leads to many false positive results. That would mean a loss in jobs for Planned Parenthood, but there is no reason that they would ever think of acting in an unscrupulous manner, right? Of course, Komen’s financial support only paid for about 4% of the screenings that Planned Parenthood performed over the past 5 years.

      Now I have read that people have quit because they thought Planned Parenthood was being targeted, but the only public source that I have found who is actually making that claim was laid off from the Komen foundation. I know that it is not possible for them to be biased in their opinions or statements. Supposedly this policy decision was made in December, so why was there no outcry from the Komen execs who disagreed back then? Why was the issue of abortion only brought about after Planned Parenthood decided to make those claims public?

      Komen has not changed their stance on funding. What has changed was the language that an investigation must be criminal in nature and not politically motivated. I agree that this change in the language is a lot more fair to those obtain grants and protects them from false accusations. People also fail to mention that they are still funding other organizations that provide abortions. I wonder why that is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s