SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2012
This week, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the nation’s leading breast cancer charity, came under fire for its decision to defund America’s leading abortion provider, Planned Parenthood. Komen states it made the decision solely based on a new policy not to provide funding for organizations undergoing investigation. Planned Parenthood, no stranger to controversy, is being investigated for its practices and handling of taxpayer money.
Komen has a history of aiding and advancing women’s health since 1982, but that didn’t stop Planned Parenthood and others from publicly criticizing and questioning the motives of the organization that has willingly given to them over the years. This is the thanks they receive, apparently. Most logical people understand that a private charity has a right to do whatever it chooses with its funds. It seems unconscionable that after Komen provided grants to Planned Parenthood in the amount of about $700,000 annually, Planned Parenthood would take it to task for choosing—whatever the reasons are—not to donate at this time. The audacity and sense of entitlement are glaring.
Komen has since reversed its decision, and of course, Planned Parenthood praises the new decision. Isn’t it rather telling that Planned Parenthood accused Komen of denying funds based on supposed political pressure but then lauded Komen’s reversal—a decision which clearly appears to be a response to actual political pressure? . . . . . . the article continues, here.
Komen has a history of aiding and advancing women’s health since 1982, but that didn’t stop Planned Parenthood and others from publicly criticizing and questioning the motives of the organization that has willingly given to them over the years. This is the thanks they receive, apparently. Most logical people understand that a private charity has a right to do whatever it chooses with its funds. It seems unconscionable that after Komen provided grants to Planned Parenthood in the amount of about $700,000 annually, Planned Parenthood would take it to task for choosing—whatever the reasons are—not to donate at this time. The audacity and sense of entitlement are glaring.
Komen has since reversed its decision, and of course, Planned Parenthood praises the new decision. Isn’t it rather telling that Planned Parenthood accused Komen of denying funds based on supposed political pressure but then lauded Komen’s reversal—a decision which clearly appears to be a response to actual political pressure? . . . . . . the article continues, here.