Nancy Brinker, the founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, and the board of directors announced Feb. 3 that they will continue to contribute grants to Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Komen has invested more than $1.9 billion in breast cancer awareness and research since 1982. Earlier in the week Komen moved to deny Planned Parenthood all fiscal support in light of a political investigation led by Rep. Cliff Stearns. Should Komen contribute to Planned Parenthood? Some have said yes and some have said no.
The decision to cease funding was made because Komen’s policy states that they will not contribute to organizations that are under investigation. After losing fiscal support and being probed by Democratic officials and the public, Komen amended its standard, which would now specify that in order to be denied funding the agency’s investigation must be criminal in nature as opposed to political.
Planned Parenthood’s hidden agenda
Planned Parenthood has a plethora of euphemisms defining who they are as an organization but has never used the term “abort” or “terminate” in their mission description. Planned Parenthood’s website states that “for more than 90 years, Planned Parenthood has promoted a commonsense approach to women’s health and well-being.”
Along with its audacious concern for individual rights, Planned Parenthood also performs approximately 300,000 abortions a year, which means that statistically by the time this article has been read, Planned Parenthood will have conducted approximately six abortions. Many pro-choice activists are apathetic towards this number considering the 10 million-plus services provided by Planned Parenthood.
However, the manner in which Planned Parenthood counts its services may be misleading. If a woman goes in for an abortion she will receive other services including tests and counseling first. Each service rendered is considered a separate service even though most are preludes to an abortion. Although 300,000 is a small figure compared to 10 million, almost half of Planned Parenthood revenue comes from abortion-related services. Suddenly 300,000 isn’t such a small number in contrast to 10 million.
Komen’s goal is profit
Sen. Patty Murray called Komen’s reversal of its earlier policy a “huge win” for women. Murray was among 26 U.S. senators who had written Komen urging the group to reconsider the decision.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi applauded the move. High-ranking political figures pressured Komen with accusations that they were denying funds toward an organization that merely defends the civil rights of the people.
Along with the difficult truth of abortion’s existence lies a matter of fiscal integrity. Komen’s mission seeks to provide a cure for breast cancer. Though this is unarguably an admirable goal many still have refused to donate to the charity because of their support to Planned Parenthood.
Komen reversed their denial of funding toward Planned Parenthood by amending their policy after they lost fiscal support from contributors who denounced Komen’s decision to cease funding. This begs the question of whether their decision was morally or fiscally based. An organization that exists to preserve life is funding an organization that is responsible for the loss of millions. Logic at its finest. Komen’s decision is based on financial gains, while ignoring the tragedies that will stem from it. Should Komen contribute to Planned Parenthood? I will speak on behalf of 300,000 silent answers and say absolutely not.
