Komen Calls It Quits

Because every time I log into Facebook I am bombarded with angry people (well, actually, just two people, but they post A LOT) protesting over Komen for the Cure cutting ties with Planned Parenthood, and because I have neither the time, inclination, nor desire to become part of an endless comment war, and because I feel like I might explode if I don’t say something in a public forum, I offer you the following post. Granted, the specific people it is directed toward will probably never read it, but I’m ok with that. I just want to make my point without having to neglect my children for the next 12 hours while “discussing” the issue  with people who won’t actually listen to anything I have to say. That’s the funny thing about arguing points on the internet. It’s seems kind of futile. Nevertheless, I’m going to indulge myself and make a few points that seem incredibly obvious to me, but have yet to see anyone else consider.

  • If I were an organization of any kind and someone who had been giving me money for  years and years indicated they would no longer be donating to me, and I felt the need to take such information to the media, I would have approached it entirely differently. I would have issued a statement saying something like this: “We would like to thank so-and-so for faithfully donating to our organization for the last ___ years. We are sincerely grateful for their support and have had the opportunity to do a lot of good with the funds they provided. Because of the good we were able to do through their support, we wholeheartedly hope to be able to reestablish a partnership with so-and-so in the future.” But that’s not quite what happened. Every article I’ve read is viciously attacking Komen and even demanding that they reinstate their funding. Umm, what? One organization and its band of followers now feels it has the right to DEMAND money from other organizations? This is even more horrific when considering that this particular organization claims to be a non-profit organization while boasting well over $1 million in excess revenue for 2009/2010. Now, I don’t know anything about running a non-profit, but it seems like they have more than enough resources to meet their needs. I don’t think anyone has a right to demand money from anyone else, but it is especially ludicrous when it is so apparent that PP is not struggling to provide the services they offer.
  • Speaking of services, if I were a cancer fighting organization that granted money to other organizations to further those endeavors, I would ensure that to organizations I partnered with were the best suited to carry out my mission. Susan G. Komen fights breast cancer, Planned Parenthood does vary little in regards to breast cancer. They offer manual breast exams, much like what you can do yourself in the shower. They do not offer mammograms. I called my local PP just to make sure. The creator of the proceeding  link called many Planned Parenthoods, all with the same result. No mammograms.
  • Again, if I were a cancer fighting organization, I certainly would not want to be granting money to an organization that offers women a product that will eventually give them the cancer I’m fighting. While PP may offer other services, I’d say the services they are best known for are birth control and abortion, both of which are known to increase one’s risk of breast cancer. Oral contraceptives are a known carcinogen and abortions are a “significant independent risk factor” for breast cancer. Even if PP offered mammograms, it seems that effort is counterproductive in light of the fact that they are increasing women’s risk for breast cancer daily.

Aside from the disgraceful behavior on the part of Planned Parenthood and her supporters, my last two points seem to make it very clear that Planned Parenthood is simply not a good match for Komen grants. Why would Komen want to fund an organization that is clearly not in line with her mission? For me, this is a very logical change on Komen’s behalf. The two organizations just don’t seem to be a good match for each other.

Advertisements

Birds, Babies & The Right to Life

bird in handOne of my favorite news sources is naturalnews.com. As the name implies, they provide natural, holistic commentary on science, nutrition, and cultural trends. Not surprisingly they’ve done a lot of coverage of the recent mysterious fish and bird deaths.

Truthfully, I don’t care about the bird deaths for the birds’ sake, but more for what implications the root cause may have on human life. Now before you label me a bird hater, please understand that my point is just that human life holds more value than a bird’s life. Not that I think one should go around massacring populations of birds, just that my larger concern is that what has been introduced into the environment is probably harmful to humans as well. Of course, in this day and age, where we routinely consume known carcinogens on a daily basis for the sake of convenience, that sounds like crazy talk. (Wrong soapbox, Mary, please redirect yourself.)

This particular bird death article caught my eye because it linked the cause to the USDA. Partly appalled but mostly unsurprised, I clicked the headline to see what they had found. Believe it or not, the findings are not what I’m here to write about. What I found even more disturbing than the planned massacre of the birds was the following concluding argument: “If the federal government thinks nothing of murdering 4 million living, breathing birds, then what else might they be capable of doing out of a total lack of respect for wildlife?” (emphasis original) WHAT??? PLEASE, PLEASE tell me I did not just read that! Especially not today.

Actually, the point is good and valid. What bothers me is it’s about BIRDS. It really bothers me that it’s socially acceptable to fight for the rights of birds but not people. Every time I see one of those heart wrenching ASPCA animal abuse commercials I quickly grow angry. Where are the commercials advocating for the children who are abused and neglected? Sure we get commercials every now and then about feeding families in third world countries, and I absolutely support that, but what about the abused and neglected children right here in our own cities and in our own neighborhoods? Who’s advocating for them?

Today is the anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion throughout pregnancy. Since that time 52 million legal abortions have been performed. I emphasize legal because of the butchers like Dr. Gosnell in PA that destroy records when things don’t go well for them. I would guess he’s not the only one of his kind and the true number is much higher.

The outrage expressed by the commenters both on the Natural News site and on Facebook at the fact that the government would knowingly poison and kill a living creature was unparalleled. That’s what breaks my heart. Despite the talking points you may hear around the water cooler, it has been well documented by scientists in court testimony that human life does in fact begin at conception. But the courts focus on defining “personhood,” which is a philosophical not a scientific concept, in the abortion cases they hear. Take away the emotionally charged issue of an abortion and this point is clear. In cases where a pregnant woman has been murdered, the murder is charged with two counts of murder. It’s funny how an unborn person is only a person when the judge wants it to be.

More to the point, why is it so unthinkable to poison a bird, but a matter of choice to poison & burn (saline abortions) or, much more commonly, dismember (suction abortions, D&C and D&E abortions) a baby? Seriously?? I want to know. What possible reason is there that is would be acceptable to poison, burn, or dismember a baby? Because it’s inconvenient? Because birth control failed? Because mom doesn’t have enough money? Because dad ran out on his responsibility? Because your abortion “counselor” told you the baby wasn’t actually a baby and couldn’t feel what was happening? (Research on fetal surgery in utero has actually found that a fetus feels pain much more intensely than an adult.) Those are the reasons why 96% of abortions occur. Look it up. The Guttmacher Institute is the research arm of Planned Parenthood. Their data about the services they provide is eye-opening.

As usual, I just want women to be told the truth. We’re smart. We can make choices. I absolutely believe that. But part of making a choice is being well-informed. I think it’s shameful that abortion counselors don’t really do that. I know that’s nothing you haven’t heard me say many times before. And once again I’m on the wrong soap box…

My actual point, tangents aside, is this: if the federal government thinks nothing of murdering 52 million living babies, then what else might they be capable of doing out of a total lack of respect for human life? And that’s a very legitimate question considering the way we treat the disabled and the huge hits the elderly took with the recent healthcare changes.

Disturbingly Refreshing

Developing fetus at 8 weeks

Did you know that it’s possible to be simultaneously disturbed and refreshed at the same time and as a result of one event?  That’s how I felt after reading this article: Q&A: Austin Abortion Doctor Responds to Protests, Abortion, Religion, and Euthanasia for the first time about a month ago and my reaction was no different when I stumbled across it again today. On the one hand, I am completely refreshed to hear some honesty about the abortion business. This atheist abortionist from Austin (gosh, I love alliteration!) lays out many of the same facts I bring up to my pro-choice friends. He doesn’t hide behind propaganda. He doesn’t try to claim he’s in business for the women who may fall victim to rape or incest or medical necessity. He knows full well that more than 96% of his patients meet none of those qualifications and he’s not ashamed. I think that’s the disturbing part. When people hide behind propaganda, you can at least feel sorry for them, give them the benefit of the doubt, and hope one day their eyes will be opened to the truth. This man knows the truth and carries on, somehow believing that both he and doctors who perform euthanasia are providing a much needed service to the world. Much of what he says is incredibly valid and accurate. The rest is incredibly frightening and disturbing.

“Aborted Baby Cries Before Cremation”

Fetal Development, 7 months. Photo from health.msn.com

Fetal Development, 7 months. Photo from health.msn.com

This is one of the most disturbing yet unsurprising news articles I’ve seen in a while.  It just goes to show you that the crap you hear from Planned Parenthood “counselors” and the propaganda the media is constantly pushing is just that, crap. Abortionists know darn good and well that the babies they kill are babies, not tissues, not blobs of cells, not whatever else they call it to ease consciences and open up the pocketbooks of scared women and girls. No one who has performed an abortion or even watched one on ultrasound really believes that crap. Abortionists kill babies. They know they kill babies. They think they have a right to kill babies. They think you have a right to ask them to kill your baby. They only support the fetus/tissue/ball of cells lingo because it helps them sell more abortions. They know it’s b.s.; they don’t care. They say whatever it takes to keep the revolving door to their clinic turning and the purses of pregnant women opening.

When does the right to life begin? The media has 45% of Americans duped into believing that right comes after birth. (Yes, I know this story isn’t from America. But don’t think this doesn’t happen here all the time. Just look at our President’s voting record on right to life issues. He’s completely in favor of exactly what happened in this story in China. The difference is American abortionists don’t allow stories like this to get leaked into media. And even when they do surface, the mainstream media doesn’t report on them. They wouldn’t dare allow the common American the opportunity to actually use their brain cells, put two and two together, and determine that the thing growing in a woman’s womb is in fact a baby.) But what about this baby in this news story? This baby survived the abortion. He was born. He was alive. And they let him die. Not a big deal to people who kill babies for a living. What does it matter how he dies as long as he ends up dead? I’m sure the abortionist would have preferred the mortician go ahead and cremate him despite being alive. It sure would have saved them a lot of hassle.

Stories like this make me so angry. And so sad. So desperately sad for everyone involved. And so furiously mad at all the lies and deception that fly around to justify abortion and all of the other atrocities that stem from it.

In case you missed the link above, here’s the link to the full story: http://www.shanghaidaily.com/sp/article/2010/201005/20100514/article_437014.htm

Abort Now, Save on Health Coverage Later?

Is this really what human life has come to? Is my sole value or lack thereof based on how I help or hinder the economy? Am I not a person with dignity and worth simply because I am a human person? Is this how I should determine whether or not I value/love/carry Ben, my 27 week old “fetus?”Oh, wait, I don’t have to answer these questions because I don’t rely on the government for healthcare.

If you’re wondering what I could possibly be talking about, let me inform you. According to comments Representative Bart Stupak made to National Review Online last week, there is a general belief among Democratic leaders supporting the current healthcare plan that aborting children now will save on long-term health care costs. Basically, what he’s hearing from some party members is that passing the Stupak Amendment will allow more children will be born, potentially costing us millions more later. “That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing.” He added, “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.” Abortion is no longer being spoken of just in terms of rights; now it’s merely a matter of cost. A child aborted today, won’t need surgery or long-term care tomorrow.

Despite being painfully aware of abortion statistics and recently learning that even the majority of Christian denominations don’t stand behind the right to life 100% of the time, I was astonished at this mentality. I suppose it’s logical considering the sad road our society has been traveling down ever since the contraceptive mentality took hold in the 60s. Thousands of U.S. women “terminate” pregnancies everyday for financial reasons. I just can’t believe that the leaders of our country feel this is an acceptable measure to attempt to balance out the national budget in the future. Are we seriously allowing our elected officials to try their hand at eugenics?

If this bill passes, that’s exactly what we’re doing. Our elected officials, our public servants, are sitting up there in Washington well aware of our national budget issues and likewise aware that there are many, many Americans with no or inadequate healthcare coverage. The plan they come up with? An $848 billion healthcare plan that climaxes when we have less uninsured Americans to pay for in the future. So, in a nutshell, our government’s plan is to create a healthcare plan that will provide coverage to the many who need it now, but quietly force them out of existence, thus eliminating the problem. WOW! What is this world coming to? I would like to think that regardless of your stance on abortion, you find this to be downright disturbing.

It is absolutely baffling that the people they are supposedly fighting so hard to protect, the un- or under-insured, the people who likely voted them into office, are the very same people they feel are disposable. I can just hear the conversation over cocktails at some ritzy watering hole that you and I couldn’t even afford to walk into, as our salaries don’t begin to compare to those of our “public servants.”

“Gosh, those people cost us a lot of money by not being able to provide for themselves.”

“Yeah, too bad we can’t just get rid of them.”

“Well, you know, Planned Parenthood was originally founded to rid our country of the ‘unfit’, ‘feeble-minded’, ‘poor’ or ‘unwanted.’ Why don’t we just give them a lot more money and let them do what they were created to do?”

“That’s perfect! We’ll tell the uninsured we’re helping them out, and simultaneously convince America we’re allowing and protecting reproductive freedom. Before you know it, we’ll be rid of the whole class that are such a drain on our economy.”

Doesn’t sound very democratic to me. Who the heck do these people think they are that they not only have the right to attempt their own little Holocaust right under our noses, but fund it with my tax dollars? Obviously, they’re too smart to say, “We want to pass a bill with an enormous, practically inconceivable price tag, but don’t worry. Let our plan play out. Eventually, we won’t have to provide for these people who can’t provide for themselves.” Something tells me that might not get as much support. Or maybe it would. Even though American’s don’t know what Washington is really up to, they’re still opposed to this healthcare reform. American’s don’t want this bill passed. 55% of Americans think Congress needs to start over from scratch. Maybe owning up to the underlying plot would clear up the necessity to force this “reform” through before American’s know what hit them. But let’s make sure not to tell those citizens that we’re ultimately trying to kill off.

Pro-Choice Epiphany Pt 2

I just found a fabulous article in the Washington Post by sports columnist Sally Jenkins. I’m so excited to see that I’m not the only woman in the world who recognizes the difference between pro-choice and pro-death. This is a woman who is truly pro-choice. She is the perfect illustration of the point I was making in my “Pro-Choice Epiphany.” I do not agree with her in terms of being pro-choice, but I’m thrilled to see her article. Check it out for yourself here.