Heil Santorum – The New US Dictator

Posted by Leann | Posted on 29-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Gay Rights, Religion, Women's Health

One of the most dangerous people rising in American Politics is Rick Santorum. Many religious people believe that he can bring a religious component to a country whose very foundation rests upon freedom of religion, that being the First Amendment and the indoctrination of separation of church and state. The Catholic religion is so oppressive that 98% of Catholic-American women do not follow its views on contraception. There are other Vatican-related views that many Catholic-American women also do not follow, such as having sex with their husband for purposes other than to have children (such as intimacy), divorcing abusive husbands to protect themselves and their children. Many Catholic-American women seek treatment after being raped, which is also not acceptable by the Catholic church, even though it’s not abortion, it’s still contraception. There are no rules to protect women against the physically intrusive abuse afflicted upon them by men. They must bear it.

If a person of Catholic faith wants to argue these points, that’s fine. You’re still allowed to practice your religion.  But I’m not a Catholic, nor do I want to become one. With all due respect, some of the basic tenents of the Catholic religion go against my very core as a human being and as woman. I work. I vote. I pay taxes. My body is mine and mine alone. When I die, my heart will stop beating and the blood will stop running through my veins. It’s all mine, all the time, from the beginng of my time until the end of my time. Nobody, and I do mean nobody, has the right to make decisions about my body except me.

Santorum doesn’t believe in the separation of church and state.  He said he felt like “throwing up” after listening to a famous speech by President Kennedy, because, unlike JFK, Rick believes that the church and state should be combined. Rick would then take his lead from the Vatican, with no respect to the religious views of others, which would only be fitting for a Catholic nation.  Too bad if you’re Protestant, or Evangelical Christian or Baptist or Jewish, or Muslim, or agnostic or athiest. If we become a Catholic nation, you may not have all the freedoms you have now, and we may change a few laws around making sure that only men of Catholic perusation can become president of the US, or maybe we can change some laws in the private sector. Maybe only Catholics can have money. Sorry if you’re a Protestant, you’ll have to move. The Catholics want your house. It’s a very slippery slope. It may seem close to your religion now, but what if it’s not close enough? Don’t think it can happen? It did in Germany. Remember that nice guy Hitler? He took advantage of the German people during a crisis. In fact, one good crisis is really all it takes to convince people to give up their rights. Think of all the rights we’ve “willingly” given up in the name of security since 9/11. We’re prime for someone like Rick Santorum. Here are some other ways Rick will keep the average American down:

According to Rick, education is not the American dream after all, just something that snobby people want. Rick has an MBA and a law degree, and expects all of HIS children to go to college or become skilled in a trade, but not yours.  I forget who he said is the snob. Higher education is for the elite, and Rick wants to keep it that way.
   
Rick doesn’t believe women should have control of their bodies, and certainly not their reproductive health since it’s against his religion. If you think welfare is expensive now, wait until you see how much it costs with a new and explosive wave of unplanned pregnancies by women who can’t afford contraception, let alone children. Any woman who takes her health or body into her own hands will be handled by Rick personally. He’ll hold you down, shove a probe into your vagina and make you watch it all on a computer screen. Well, that’s not fair, you’re allowed to close your eyes. And yes, this is really on many state ballots right now, which Rick supports. No joke.

Rick says women do not belong in the work force. They should be minding their husbands and keeping the house in order.  There is no other purpose for women.

Rick wants gay military to hide their sexuality so as not to distract the real men of the military.

Rick believes that neither women nor gays should serve in the military. No point honoring any of their achievements or bravery, as they are a “distraction” to the heterosexual men on the battlefield.

Rick thinks the best way to rejuvenate the economy is to get women and gays out of the workforce and give their jobs to men who have families to support.

Rick’s goal is to repeal any and all social freedoms that contradict his religious views. He’ll be in your bedroom making sure you don’t have sex unless you plan to have children (which the husbands will determine), he’ll be refusing your kids a higher education, he’ll put women back in the kitchen where they belong, which will open up tons of jobs for men, he’ll be shoving gays and lesbians back in the closet (or refusing them jobs), and he’ll be ruling with an iron fist. He says he wants less government, but without more government, how can he possibly enforce all of these things? Oh, that’s right, our kids will have less access to higher education, so it shouldn’t be too hard to push them around.

You’ll have less education, no women grabbing your job (assuming you’re a guy since women have no business working, especially not being in the military or politics), more kids, and a new national religion. “Life, liberty and the pursuit of Rick Santorum’s idea of happiness.” The new Declaration of Independence. Rick will consult with the Roman Pope and together they’ll give you a briefing on the new theology-based US Laws.  Be home by 7 pm. That’s the new curfew by the way.

Santorum’s Catholic America

Posted by Leann | Posted on 21-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Religion, Women's Health

I don’t care what religion Santorum is, really he can be a Catholic, non-denominational Christian, Jewish, Muslim or whatever he’s interested in. However, I do care not to have anyone’s religion shoved down my throat. I do not care to subscribe to the Catholic theology, a hierarchy that has traditionally hung women out to dry in terms of safety and human value in general. I’m also not particularly happy about how this church concealed thousands of child rapes, praying on young souls should they speak up in any way, all while working together in a conspiracy to keep their actions under the radar. Their male-importance is stifling and offensive, which is why I left their church many years ago. I certainly don’t want to be forced to live by the Catholic church rules. I think my religion should be my choice, not the choice made for …me by the President of the United States.
 
I also don’t think that Rick Santorum is qualified to talk to me or any other woman about birth control or any other health issue; he’s not a doctor. Nor do I think it is appropriate for a group of all-male right-wing congressional and religious leaders to determine how to best constrain my reproductive health and freedom. I think such concerns are adequately covered by my doctor and me.
 
Santorum’s narrow view of how the world “should work” is completely and thoroughly out of touch with reality and with a large portion of the citizens of the United States. Anyone who claims they want “less government” should think twice about voting for a man who is clearly on a mission to remove rights and force women to live by his Catholic, stifling beliefs. Anyone who is a financial conservative needs to wonder why insurance companies would be more than willing to collect a higher premium from faith-based organizations to not offer birth control, and then hand out free contraception (because providing contraception is cheaper). People running for office who want to restrict our reproductive health options by limiting or removing birth control as a health care option for hard-working American women clearly are not for women’s rights, nor do they have a good plan to get the US back to a balanced budget.
 
The discussion has moved from pro-choice and anti-choice abortion, it’s now about trying to control women’s lives and limit their sexual freedom. Comments and jokes like “put an aspirin between your knees” as a means for contraception are about as backward thinking and insulting as anyone can be. Having this discussion, even throwing around such a ridiculous “joke” while we’re trying to climb our way out of the financial Bush mess is about as clueless as ever. Does Santorum really think that removing birth control from working-women’s health insurance options will somehow help the economy? Does he think women will go back to letting the man decide things for them? Does he think we want to give up our jobs, our passions, our missions and live by his suffocating theology? Just as a matter of reference, 98% of Catholic women don’t live by the Catholic rules. I hardly want to join that 2% bandwagon. I can’t help but wonder why Santorum would they think the rest of us would be so willing to give up our access to reproductive health care if people in his own church aren’t willing either.
 
Santorum doesn’t like the idea of women in combat, a real insult to our heroic women who have been fighting in our wars. He also doesn’t like the idea of women working period. He thinks women belong at home, cleaning after and cooking meals for their husbands and kids, having sex only for the purpose of procreation. Today’s women are not interested in going backward, we like our choices. And we like having sex for fun, just like men do. OMGosh what a sin! I might have blushed at such an admission in my 20s, but I make no apology for stating my opinions today. Santorum needs to stay out of the bedrooms of the American people. He needs to understand that trying to control and limit reproductive freedom of American women is a big giant mistake while women can still vote (ratified not even 100 years ago). He might have won the anti-choice abortion issue, but his views on contraception are a giant leap from abortion issues, and it directly affects 99% of American women, not just those crazy liberal Democrat women. Republican women use contraception too. And men are happy not to have to chip in on child support en masse. Teen pregnancies are down for a reason. Does Santorum think they’re all going to church and putting aspirin between their knees? Hell no, they’re getting information and they’re getting contraception.
 
Santorum is totally out of touch with the American people. Vote him in now and Obama will win by a landslide. Of course, that’s just what I want.

Obama, The Health Care Reform Bill, Birth Control and the Catholic Church

Posted by Leann | Posted on 10-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Religion, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, this is a direct attack on women’s rights in the United States by the Catholic church.

Let’s be clear about what Obama is fighting for. This is the war between the Catholic church’s rights and women’s rights in the United States.

The Health Care Reform bill states that only religious organizations that primarily employ and serve their parishioners would be exempt from the requirement to provide insurance that covers birth control. Churches are exempt from providing insurance that includes birth control to women, but Catholic-run hospitals, agencies and colleges are not.

This mandate is very important for women in this country, and whether or not the Catholic church has the right to inflict their religion on women who are employed by them to serve the general population in Catholic organizations in the United States.

Obama believes that every woman should have access to birth control through the insurance provided by her employer. I agree wholeheartedly!

I find it fascinating to listen to all the other MEN who are weighing in on this issue – primarily the bishops and Republican candidates who are rallying to the side of the male dominated Catholic hierarchy rather than the women who be directly affected by this health mandate for women. As usual, they are distorting the facts. I can hear their arguments now, “How dare Obama attack the very fabric of the Catholic church!” Never mind the needs and rights of the women, they shouldn’t even have the right to vote let alone control their reproductive health! I mean, nobody would actually SAY that, but I’m confident that many of them think that way. Who do all these guys think they’re kidding? These aren’t necessarily Catholic women who we’re talking about; these women are hired under the clause that these organizations may not discriminate based on religion to begin with. Think about that. If these organizations can’t discriminate when they hire someone, what should give them the right to refuse to comply with other employer laws surrounding that employment? Oh it’s women, and the Catholic church is holding steadfast that they should be able to continue to refuse women fundamental health care rights because THEY don’t believe women should have those rights. Controlling women is nothing new for the Catholic church, but preserving the rights of women is the job of our represented officials - Obama, Democrats and Republicans not excluded.

If the Catholic organizations who serve and are staffed by the general population can hire outside of their religion, in fact, not be allowed to discriminate based on religion in their hiring process, why then should they be granted immunity from our other laws when it pertains directly to women’s right to control her own reproductive health care?

This is not a war perpetrated by Obama against the Catholic church, but rather it is a war perpetrated by the Catholic church against women who are employed by Catholic agencies, but who do not necessarily belong to or believe in the Catholic doctrine.

Santorum, Planned Parenthood and Prop 8 – A Mixed Message in the US

Posted by Leann | Posted on 08-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Gay Rights, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Santorum had a full sweep of three states in the race for the presidential Republican nomination – Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado. Not only is he against abortion, a standard Republican platform, he’s also against birth control and gay marriage. So what are we to take away from a landmark day like yesterday, when a man like Santorum wins three states, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, Karen Handel resigns over a scandal she waged against Planned Parenthood and a Californian court upholds that the gay marriage bill, Proposition 8 is unconstitutional for discriminating against gays and lesbians?

Let’s look a little further…

Rick Santorum – Republican Presidential Candidate For White Straight Men and Nobody Else – Winner of  3 States in One Day

Santorum is the same man who lost his 2006 Senate bid for reelection by a landslide 18 points in Pennsylvania for his polarizing views that alienated women and those in the gay and lesbian community. That’s quite a lot of people.

He condemned couples who live together without being married, and criticized women for working outside of the home, pointing to “radical feminism” as the primary culprit. Radical feminism, by the way, is the notion that women are people too. That’s really all it is. Kinda crazy, huh? It makes me concerned for his wife and daughters who are probably taught that it is best to leave the big decisions for the man in the house and not use their own brains. Forget the abortion debate, Santorum goes straight for the jugular in that he doesn’t believe that women should use or have access to birth control. He is completely and utterly against most of the services that Planned Parenthood is known for. His notions date so far back to women’s suffrage that I can’t help but wonder if he also thinks that women shouldn’t have the right to vote. There is no mistaking that for women, Santorum is a dangerous guy whose goals are to eliminate as many of our rights as he possibly can.

Santorum is not terribly likable by the gay and lesbian community either. He flatly opposes legalized gay marriage, as do many conservatives. However, he went one step further, citing gay marriage could result in legal protections for polygamy, incest and bestiality. Yeah, bestiality. Clearly he is out of touch, but it does leave one to wonder what he does in his own bedroom.

Karen Handel’s Lost War Against Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood came under attack this past week when Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced they were going to de-fund Planned Parenthood’s breast screening program, which they’ve contributed to for the past 20 years. Although Komen never admitted that the decision was political, there was never a doubt in the public eye, for those who support the choice to have abortion or those who do not. I’m sure Komen was surprised to find themselves the focus of intense public outrage, losing supporters in record numbers, while Planned Parenthood received an unexpected $3 million windfall from thousands of women who had received a variety of services from them, from breast screenings to reproductive health care when they were unable to afford it themselves. Tens of thousands of comments lit up Komen’s Facebook page condemning them for politicizing women’s heallh care. Feeling betrayed, long-time Komen supporters stated that they were cutting up their pink ribbons and discarding everything pink, refusing to purchase anything that would provide Komen with more funds to achive their new political agenda. Many believed that Komen’s recent VP Karen Handel was behind the unexpected decision,. Handel lost her 2010 bid for Georgia Governor on the platform of being against and planning to defund and dismantel Planned Parenthood. The Huffington Post stated that they have seen internal communication from Komen executives that supports the accusation that Handel instigated and helped plan the move to stop funding breast cancer screenings for low-income women at Planned Parenthood. After Komen recinded its decision, the public demanded Handel’s resignation, which came yesterday. The message was loud and clear, “Don’t politicize women’s health.” So how does a guy like Rick Santorum win on the same day that Handel hands over her resignation?

The Legal Right to Marry is Gaining Momentum for Gays and Lesbians

The decision to reject Proposition 8 was upheld by California’s 9th District Court as unconstitutional, citing that it was discriminatory against gays and lesbians. It is expected that proponents of the anti-gay bill will appeal yesterday’s latest ruling, sending it next to the Supreme Court for a final ruling.

Those in favor of the bill believe that marriage should only be between opposite-sex couples and feel that providing gays and lesbians with the same rights diminishes the very constition of marriage. Those who oppose the bill say that it discriminates against gays and Lesbians in fundamental ways, that their partners are not recognized in many legal and socially situations – from visiting partners in hospital emergency rooms to property rights after death to the privilege of not being required to testify against his or her spouse in any proceeding. Gay rights activists believe that states must recognize their civil unions and grant them the same rights as opposite-sex couples.

 So in a day and age where it seems like women have made a very clear statement on their views about contraception and health care relating specifically to themselves, where gays and lesbians are one step closer to legalized marriage, a man like Rick Santorum who adamantly opposes all of the aforementioned is nominated for the Rupublican Presidential candidate in three state elections on the very same day.

Just like the middle class is eroding and leaving us with two distinct groups in the US – the rich and the poor, so too are our views polorizing us as a nation, where some are prepared to wage attack on the fundamental rights that have taken years to achieve.

In our world where we have so much to think about, together as a nation - war, education, the economy, jobs, international relations - it’s a wonder that anyone has the energy, desire or time to spend diminishing the rights of others to make themselves and their narrow, sexist, biggoted, and religious views the law of this land, the United States of America.

12 Lessons We Learned From the 2012 Susan G. Komen Debacle

Posted by Leann | Posted on 07-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Susan G. Komen for a Cure, one of the nation’s leading fundraising organizations has taught us a few things about non-profit organizations and women’s access to health care. Here are 12 important lesson’s we’ve learned from Komen’s recent mistakes.

  1. Don’t hire someone whose political agenda could hurt the people your mission is designed to help.
  2. A non-profit organization that is not political or religious in nature should not become political or religious at a later time. It’s against the law. Putting a different spin on it does not change culpability.
  3. A non-profit organization who develops ties to a specific political party does so with the expectation of losing many – possibly more than half – of it’s supporters, including not only those who donate financially, but also those who organize and participate to raise money to help further the agenda of the organization. People are willing to participate and sacrifice for a cause that has touched their hearts. When there appears to be a shift in that agenda, supporters feel betrayed that the reason why they were there in the first place has become secondary to the new agenda.
  4. When a non-profit organization takes aim at a partner who has been steadfast, supporters will believe it necessary to choose sides, often with the partner who just got dumped. Contributions to the finger-pointing organization will immediately decline, while contributions to the other organization will increase.
  5. When a non-profit organization discontinues a long-term good relationship with a partner for political reasons, they immediately come under public scrutiny which will likely result in a very public audit. 
  6. Public trust for an organization whose mission becomes clouded with a political agenda will be greatly affected. Trust may never full return, no matter how sorry the leaders are. 
  7. Non-profit organizations who share a common goal should stay committed to that goal, regardless of the political persuasions of all involved.
  8. Politics have no business in women’s health.
  9. Women need to stop letting the issue of abortion divide us to the point where we hurt each other by refusing to provide important health care services because legal abortion is provided within the same organization. We need to stand together so that our rights are never diminished or taken away.
  10. There are much better ways of addressing the needs of women than by removing health care from those women who can’t otherwise afford it.
  11. People who come together under a common cause must be reminded of what will happen to those it servers should that organization no longer exist.
  12. The mission should always always always be at the forefront of everything a non-profit organization does. Never lose sight of the mission. Staying focused on the mission is the number one most important thing a non-profit organization will ever have in the relationship it has with its supporters.

Karen Handel Resigns from Susan G. Komen for the Cure

Posted by Leann | Posted on 07-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , ,

The much anticipated resignation from Karen Handel just arrived. Here’s a copy of her resignation letter:

February 7, 2012

The Honorable Nancy Brinker

CEO, Susan G. Komen for the Cure VIA EMAIL

5005 LBJ Freeway, Suite 250

Dallas, Texas 75244

Dear Ambassador Brinker:

Susan G. Komen for the Cure has been the recognized leader for more 30 years in the fight against breast cancer here in the US – and increasingly around the world.

As you know, I have always kept Komen’s mission and the women we serve as my highest priority – as they have been for the entire organization, the Komen Affiliates, our many supporters and donors, and the entire community of breast cancer survivors. I have carried out my responsibilities faithfully and in line with the Board’s objectives and the direction provided by you and Liz.

We can all agree that this is a challenging and deeply unsettling situation for all involved in the fight against breast cancer. However, Komen’s decision to change its granting strategy and exit the controversy surrounding Planned Parenthood and its grants was fully vetted by every appropriate level within the organization. At the November Board meeting, the Board received a detailed review of the new model and related criteria. As you will recall, the Board specifically discussed various issues, including the need to protect our mission by ensuring we were not distracted or negatively affected by any other organization’s real or perceived challenges. No objections were made to moving forward.

I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen’s future and the women we serve. However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone’s political beliefs or ideology. Rather, both were based on Komen’s mission and how to better serve women, as well as a realization of the need to distance Komen from controversy. I believe that Komen, like any other nonprofit organization, has the right and the responsibility to set criteria and highest standards for how and to whom it grants.

What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision – one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact – has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly.

Just as Komen’s best interests and the fight against breast cancer have always been foremost in every aspect of my work, so too are these my priorities in coming to the decision to resign effective immediately. While I appreciate your raising a possible severance package, I respectfully decline. It is my most sincere hope that Komen is allowed to now refocus its attention and energies on its mission.

Sincerely,

Komen, Planned Parenthood, Breast Cancer, Abortion and the Moral High Ground

Posted by Leann | Posted on 07-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The reasons ares simple: access to reproductive health care for low income women is still being debated and Karen Handel is still employed by Susan G. Komen, even if less empowered due to public outrage. Right wing anti-Planned Parenthood people are still angry with Komen for “caving” and so the struggle to protect the services at Planned Parenthood are front and center. The war is stronger than ever between the right-wingers and leftists regarding abortion. Somewhere in this mess, we all forgot about breast cancer. 

Komen really screwed up. Instead of people rallying to move forward for the sake of a cure for breast cancer, their Facebook page now has over 11,000 comments about them and the endless abortion arguments that have raged since abortions became legal. Misinformation about Planned Parenthood continues – some people on the right are angry because they don’t understand Planned Parenthood’s commitment to breast cancer. They don’t understand why Komen would fund an organization or specific clinic that does not have mammogram equipment, not realizing that not all breast exams start or result in mammograms. Sometimes Planned Parenthood and other doctors provide initial screenings and, when necessary, write prescriptions for women to receive this specialized care at mammograms centers. A prescription is required in order to receive a mammogram. Planned Parenthood also provides self-exam education.  

The grant money provided to Planned Parenthood addresses the breast health care needs of 170,000 of Planned Parenthood’s 700,000 breast health care recipients, and is part of Komen’s mission to treat and eventually cure breast cancer and the grants they provide to Planned Parenthood. The partnership should continue, and the goals should be clear. But we forgot. We’re angry about abortions! 

Making the fight against breast cancer the new podium to grandstand about abortions spells disaster no matter which side of the fence you’re on. Refusing services or money to help women receive these important services seems paramount to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Is anyone still interested in finding a cure for breast cancer? Is it morally right or wrong to provide funding to women who receive breast health care in a clinic that also performs abortions? What is the moral high ground in this situation? 

A breast cancer fundraising group dedicated to finding a cure should also contribute money to help low-income women who are dealing with breast cancer now. I agree that the funds should be earmarked specifically for breast health care, and that should be the end of the discussion. All other discussions take away from the mission of saving lives. 

Personally I have always admired the astounding fund-raising efforts by Susan G. Komen for the Cure. I see their pink ribbons on a variety of products, and I’ve always made the effort to purchase those products because several women in my life have dealt with breast cancer. In my mind, each purchase, each donation was a tip to women and their fight to survive. This message must be reinstated or the efforts to find a cure will forever be stunted. Susan G. Komen should continue to provide grant money to any agency who performs breast screenings and other breast care treatment for women who could not otherwise afford such care. Komen needs to find its footing and get their message out loud and clear so that the discussion about abortion simply has no room to fester and grow like the cancer that is currently eroding what was once Komen’s rock-solid foundation.

Susan G. Komen – Crying a Freaking River

Posted by Leann | Posted on 06-02-2012

Category : American Politics, Women's Health

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s no secret that the founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, Nancy Brinker, served as an ambassador under President George W. Bush. Nobody really faulted her for that role; her political persuasion was her own business. Everyone united easily under the umbrella of finding a cure for breast cancer.

Politics had nothing to do with the mission of finding a cure for breast cancer or providing breast health care to any woman anywhere  – until now.

I hope that all politicians and non-profit organizations are paying attention to what happened with Susan G. Komen for the Cure when they decided to politicize women’s breast health care by announcing they were going to discontinue funding breast care and education at Planned Parenthood.

It was a big mistake. Huge.

Karen Handel became Komen’s Vice President of Public Policy in April, 2011. She joined the organization after she lost her 2010 bid for Governor of Georgia. She was very vocal in her desire to defund Planned Parenthood then, and apparently this mission didn’t stop when she accepted her position at Komen.

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest health care clinic for disadvantaged, uninsured and underinsured teen-aged girls and women. 97% of the services they provide include pap smears (a test for pre-cancerous and cancerous cells in the female reproductive system), STD testing, breast exams and education (including writing prescriptions for mammograms), birth control, prenatal care, counseling and cancer prevention vaccines. I think everyone will agree that that’s quite a lot of good stuff packed into that 97%.

The other 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services constitutes abortions and abortion-related counseling. Abortion is a legal medical procedure that is available at Planned Parenthood for women who are disadvantaged, uninsured or underinsured. Abortions are not funded with tax money or grants provided by Susan G. Komen. It’s important to point out that Planned Parenthood isn’t the only game in town; abortion is also offered at many other clinics and hospitals around the country for those who have insurance or who can otherwise afford it.

After 20 years of a happy and fruitful relationship regarding breast care, the folks at Susan G. Komen decided that they’d withdraw their annual $700,000 grant to Planned Parenthood, probably assuming that there’d be a slight backlash, but nothing too major. After all, who could blame them for withdrawing support from an organization that provides legal abortions to disadvantaged, uninsured and underinsured teen-aged girls and women? The problem was that their funding went directly to life-saving breast exams, mammograms and referrals to mammograms (for the clinics that don’t offer them onsite, as is the case with many doctor offices). Oh, and it also went to breast health education. Their funding had nothing to do with abortions at all – ever. It ONLY had to do with providing teen-aged girls and women breast health care and education.

Planned Parenthood stated that the grant provided by Susan G. Komen provided breast care for over 170,000 teen-aged girls and women. Planned Parenthood typically sees more than 700,000 patients annually for breast health care services. It became clear that Planned Parenthood would have to find the funds to make up the $700,000 loss in order to continue providing these breast care services. Well, that was first blush. Thousands of people, many of whom were women who had received services through Planned Parenthood at one time or another, were infuriated with Susan G. Komen for politicizing this in the first place. Komen surely didn’t anticipate that so many of their supporters would rally to Planned Parenthood.  In fact, many were so angry they withdrew their support from Komen and immediately donated to Planned Parenthood ON THE SPOT. Without warning, Planned Parenthood became the recipient of  a near $3 million windfall. Susan G. Komen immediately lost many long-time supporters, organizers and an untold amount of donations. Of course, they did receive donations from anti-Planned Parenthood people. But the worst part was, Komen alienated half of their support base by becoming political in the first place.

Brinker stated that the reason for withdrawing the grant was because they changed their grant policies, which now stated that they couldn’t provide grants to any organization that was under investigation. Florida Republican Congressman Cliff Stearns is seeking a financial audit from Planned Parenthood; meaning they are, “under investigation.” Planned Parenthood is often a target of right-wing politicians, all hoping to find a way to shut down this vital health care clinic that caters to the reproductive care of women. It’s a ridiculous claim at best. Of course, Komen made no mention of withdrawing their research grant from Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) for being under investigation for sexual assault charges perpetrated against numerous children over the course o many years, where officials aware of the situation but did nothing to stop it. Thus, funding would ONLY cease for 170,000 women per year who benefited from their grant at Planned Parenthood. Everyone else was safe! Whew!

A day later, in an interview with Andrea Mitchell, Brinker again reassured everyone that the decision to withdraw funds was not political at all. According to Brinker, “We’ve been providing breast health education for 30 years, and we just don’t want to do that anymore.”  Uh uh. They’re just tired of that education stuff. OMG!!! THEY DON’T WANT TO EDUCATE WOMEN ON BREAST HEALTH ANYMORE!!! That’s one of the craziest things I could have imagined hearing from a non-profit organization whose mission is to cure breast cancer. I mean, how will they even know who has breast cancer? How will women know how to perform self exams?  Or is “the cure” just for women who can afford it?

Oh, Brinker also informed Mitchell that Komen didn’t want to have “duplicitous” services within the same area. Many people do not realize that a woman cannot walk into a mammogram clinic and get a mammogram on the spot. She has to have a prescription written by a medical doctor. Therefore, many Planned Parenthood clinics offer duplicitous services, since all medical doctors in the area can write a prescription for a mammogram too.  As we all know, doctors are not required to provide services to women with limited means, but some will. You’ll have to find them on your own. I think. I guess. Surely Brinker wouldn’t forsake the low-income women in the US. I mean, right?

Planned Parenthood leader, Cecile Richards appeared in several interviews immediately after this story hit the airwaves, clearly an effort to reach out to Komen to rethink their decision so they would not have to turn away women who required breast screenings. She repeatedly praised Komen’s efforts in the fight against breast cancer and suggested that she believed the decision was the result of right-wing bullying against Komen. I agree. Komen’s message got muddled in this massive public relations disaster, but Planned Parenthood wasn’t fighting back with a big political message. They were fighting for women to have access to health care – breast health care.

I found this little nugget at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure: “In the 2009-2010 fiscal year, ending March 31, 2010, Komen reported approximately US $400 million in earnings. Of this, $365 million (91.3 percent) came from contributions from the public, including donations, sponsorships, race entry fees, and contributed goods and services. Approximately $35 million (8.8 percent) came from interest and dividends and gains on investments.”

The sad reality is that $700,000 doesn’t even rack up to one percent of their annual earnings. They just don’t wanna help or educate low-income women who receive services from the only place where they can afford to receive them.

I guess they didn’t realize that many of these women, or their families or friends have contributed in some way to Komen, ran or organized the races, collected funds, etc. and they were not too happy about this. I guarantee that $365 million was not raised solely by right-wing anti-Planned Parenthood Republicans. What a stupid move!

With such intense public outage that continued for three straight days, Brinker announced that they would continue funding Planned Parenthood after all, with a message, “We’re sorry. Let’s figure out how to get back on the same team.”  Or something like that. Now they alienated the other half of their support base who had just rallied to their side days and moments before, all doing their happy anti-Planned Parenthood dance. Everyone was sure that they wouldn’t help anyone at Planned Parenthood anymore, so when the pendulum swung the other way,  they were outraged too – and they wanted a refund! It’s funny how I did not hear of a single leftist asking for her money back, but the right-wingers were all about the money. (I thought that deserved an honorable mention.  The refund requests actually made a Fox news headline!) Anyway, how dare a breast cancer organization continue funding breast cancer screenings, and, you know, help save lives of women. “How dare they?” ask the people who call themselves “pro-lifers.” Clearly a misnomer.

What a mess.

Some are calling for Brinker’s resignation over this debacle, a sad testament to the woman who began the organization named after and dedicated to her sister. I think she’ll be forgiven if she’s really sorry. Not everyone agrees. An overwhelming majority is calling for Handel’s resignation, and the demand is only growing. A recent article in the Huffington Post reveals inside information that Handel had intentionally drafted the new grant funding policy so that it would only affect Planned Parenthood, and so that it would appear as though the decision wasn’t political. The problem for Handel is that there are emails that the Huffington Post claims to have seen regarding her motivation and true intentions. The problem for Komen is their non-profit status: “Section 501(c)(3) organizations are subject to limits or absolute prohibitions on engaging in political activities.”

Handel’s political bias came through loud and clear when she retweeted this post shortly after Komen made their first announcement: “Just like a pro-abortion group to turn a cancer orgs decision into a political bomb to throw. Cry me a freaking river.”

Nearly all of the posts on Facebook claimed political foul. It was blatantly obvious. Even after Brinker’s initial annoucement, right-wing anti-Planned Parenthood people offererd their praise for not supporting those “baby killers”.  It got pretty nasty. There was never really a question that the decisions were politcally based, even though Brinker adamantly denied it in her videos. Her denial just added fuel to the flames.

When Komen finally reversed the decision, I thought it ironic that many right-wing anti-Planned Parenthood people claimed they gave into political pressure. The simple truth is that nobody made this more political than Komen and the anti-Planned Parenthood people. It gained a lot of momentum with Handel at the helm. She had no control over the path it took, which I’m sure she didn’t anticipate. At all. Komen was pressured into moving away from providing funding for women’s breast healthcare, and Handel was the primary instigator. That’s what started this controversy, plain and simple. Komen wasn’t funding abortion; they were funding breast health care and education. How did Brinker and Handel manage to get so far off the main path?

The reality is that every right wing whackjob who has politicized women’s breast health has done an insane amount of damage. Women need reproductive health care, and specific to this issue, they need breast health care – even if they can’t afford it. Thanks to Handel, Komen and the anti-Planned Parenthood people, the time came for women to make a stand against the ever-growing attacks on healthcare providers who perform abortions, regardless of the other services they provide. As shattering as Komen’s initial announcement was, the response they received was equally necessary. Planned Parenthood provides wonderful healthcare to women across this country, with very little of it being about abortions, and it’s high time everybody realize this.

Are you politicians and non-profits-with-a-political-agenda paying attention here?

Thanks to this controversy, Komen’s reputation may forever be damaged, and Planned Parenthood received nearly $3 million in donations in less than a week, changing the topic into something it never was. Until now, Komen has always been about finding a cure for breast cancer, for improved breast health. The right-wing anti-Planned Parenthood people who made breast health care an abortion issue  have set back women’s health care and research considerably. Komen’s support may never fully return, and Planned Parenthood doesn’t do research. I wonder how many lives will be lost over this.

It’s time to quit using women’s access to healthcare at Planned Parenthood as a political platform. If an organization with a wonderful goal of curing breast cancer can fall prey to this evil political hot topic,  you can be assured that the women (and men) in this country who have needed or support Planned Parenthood will rally together again. It’s time to remove womens healthcare from political grandstanding. Just ask Nancy Brinker or Karen Handel what they’ve just learned.

Politics and political persuasions have no business meddling in women’s access to healthcare.

Breast cancer kills women. Stick with the topic and everybody wins.