Friday, February 03, 2012
Planned Parenthood vs. Susan G. Komen for the Cure
In case you missed it, the there was a great big blowup recently in the women’s health charity world. The big breast cancer and fundraising organization, Susan G. Komen for the Cure – the marketing geniuses who came up with the pink ribbon idea for breast cancer awareness, and who engage in a lot of marketing and fundraising for causes related to breast cancer. Whatever they don’t need for operations and overhead, they dispense to hundreds of different breast-cancer related organizations, funding education and awareness activities, screenings, mammograms, and research toward preventing and curing the terrible disease.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure sparked a controversy when they announced they were pulling their $600,000 annual grant to Planned Parenthood, claiming that a new internal rule adopted by the Komen board stated they can’t fund organizations that are currently under a congressional investigation. Planned Parenthood was the only charity currently receiving funds that fell into that category, so they felt singled out and objected – claiming that the Komen foundation’s decision was politically motivated and that the real issue was – que’lle surprise! – abortion.
Hilarity ensued.
Planned Parenthood supporters furiously accused Susan G. Komen for the Cure of making a principled stand. Meanwhile, fueled by Facebook, Twitter, blogs, other social media, Komen’s fundraising more than doubled in the days following the announcement, in what the media described as a severe anti-Komen backlash.
At stake, of course, was more than 0.6 percent of Planned Parenthood’s budget for the year. Planned Parenthood executives announced that without this funding, either they would have to collect another $1.75 for every abortion performed, or women would be denied mammograms.
Naturally, they were leaning towards getting out of the mammogram business. Which – of course, it turned out they already were: A pro-life activist recently called up 30 different Planned Parenthood facilities around the country, recording the results. All 30 facilities informed her that Planned Parenthood didn’t do mammograms.
Not to worry: Planned Parenthood supporters rode to the rescue – led by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. As a billionaire himself, and founder of the Bloomberg media empire, Mayor Bloomberg – a ferocious 2nd amendment opponent and the man who thinks government should be free to dictate your choice in French fries, pledged to donate $250,000 to demonstrate his commitment to a woman’s right to choose.
For its part, Susan G. Komen for the Cure was stung by the allegation that its decision to withdraw funding from Planned Parenthood may have secretly been rooted in principle. So about 48 hours after making the announcement that they would no longer provide funding to Planned Parenthood, the female-dominated leadership at Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced that they had changed their mind.
The decision was reversed, and Komen announced its commitment to continuing their “treasured relationship” with Planned Parenthood. So Susan G. Komen donors, regardless of their feelings on abortion, will still send $600,000 per year to an organization that doesn’t even do mammograms.
Susan G. Komen for the Cure sparked a controversy when they announced they were pulling their $600,000 annual grant to Planned Parenthood, claiming that a new internal rule adopted by the Komen board stated they can’t fund organizations that are currently under a congressional investigation. Planned Parenthood was the only charity currently receiving funds that fell into that category, so they felt singled out and objected – claiming that the Komen foundation’s decision was politically motivated and that the real issue was – que’lle surprise! – abortion.
Hilarity ensued.
Planned Parenthood supporters furiously accused Susan G. Komen for the Cure of making a principled stand. Meanwhile, fueled by Facebook, Twitter, blogs, other social media, Komen’s fundraising more than doubled in the days following the announcement, in what the media described as a severe anti-Komen backlash.
At stake, of course, was more than 0.6 percent of Planned Parenthood’s budget for the year. Planned Parenthood executives announced that without this funding, either they would have to collect another $1.75 for every abortion performed, or women would be denied mammograms.
Naturally, they were leaning towards getting out of the mammogram business. Which – of course, it turned out they already were: A pro-life activist recently called up 30 different Planned Parenthood facilities around the country, recording the results. All 30 facilities informed her that Planned Parenthood didn’t do mammograms.
Not to worry: Planned Parenthood supporters rode to the rescue – led by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. As a billionaire himself, and founder of the Bloomberg media empire, Mayor Bloomberg – a ferocious 2nd amendment opponent and the man who thinks government should be free to dictate your choice in French fries, pledged to donate $250,000 to demonstrate his commitment to a woman’s right to choose.
For its part, Susan G. Komen for the Cure was stung by the allegation that its decision to withdraw funding from Planned Parenthood may have secretly been rooted in principle. So about 48 hours after making the announcement that they would no longer provide funding to Planned Parenthood, the female-dominated leadership at Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced that they had changed their mind.
The decision was reversed, and Komen announced its commitment to continuing their “treasured relationship” with Planned Parenthood. So Susan G. Komen donors, regardless of their feelings on abortion, will still send $600,000 per year to an organization that doesn’t even do mammograms.
Labels: Abortion, cancer, charities, finance, health care, Politics, women
Comments:
Post a Comment
