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.


“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.

Tim Tebow Superbowl Uproar

I’ve been really surprised over the controversy being caused by Tim Tebow’s Superbowl ad. If you haven’t heard, Focus on the Family spent $2 million (raised specifically for this cause, not taken from their general budget) on a commercial featuring Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, to be aired during the Superbowl. The theme? “Celebrate family. Celebrate Life.” Why? Because Pam’s doctors advised her to abort Tim due to medical complications and look at the man he his today. I can’t begin to understand why people are so angry about a 30 second ad delivering the message “Celebrate family. Celebrate life.” aired during the Superbowl. Here are some of the unconvincing arguments I’ve heard from those opposed.

1. “I only want to see fun ads about beer and junk food.”

Without your life you would be unable to enjoy things like ridiculous commercials, beer and junk food. Without life no other issues, whether serious or pleasurable, exist. Why can’t they mix? You’re alive, you’re enjoying yourself and if you have a family they’re likely watching the game with you, so what’s so offensive about the message “Celebrate family. Celebrate life.”? That’s what you’re going to be doing as the commercial airs. Plus, it seems a little degrading to your own intelligence to say, “I only want to watch half-naked women sell me beer, reptiles sell me insurance and whatever other craziness airs, but most definitely not anything serious.” What if the commercial were one of those St. Jude “thanks and giving” ads? Would you be complaining then?

2. “I don’t think Jesus would want them to “waste” $2 million on a commercial.”

Jesus tells us (Luke 12:48) that to whom much is given, much is expected. The donors who paid for this ad have clearly been given very much.  I think Jesus would prefer these people spend their money on a positive, uplifting ad celebrating the dignity of family and life, aired during an event watched by an estimated 93.2 million people in the US alone, rather than spend it on a few new yachts or exotic vacations or whatever else people with $2 million have the capacity to buy. But, while we’re talking about what Jesus would or wouldn’t do, I doubt he supports the companies spending their $2 million on the sex-soaked commercials that you prefer to watch.

3. “Can you imagine the uproar if Planned Parenthood (privately funded) ran a commercial during the superbowl?? People would lose their sh*t. Free speech is all fine and good if treated equally.” Money talks” isn’t free speech. I don’t think divisive politics belong in the land of superbowl commercials.” (I copied this directly from my girlfriend’s facebook page. These are her words, not mine. I deeply respect this individual, but take serious issue with this statement.)

Oh my gosh, where to begin?! I was stunned when I read this! First of all, Planned Parenthood IS NOT privately funded! (Focus on the family, however, is.) In 2008 Planned Parenthood received $320 million from taxpayers. I couldn’t find a statistic on the total they’ve received to date, but from 1973-2005 PP received $3.9 BILLION in tax dollars. As you can infer from looking at these numbers, they get more and more dough each year. (It’s possible the above author was suggesting a privately funded commercial on the behalf of PP could be aired, and if that’s the case I’ll address that momentarily).

As far as free speech being treated equally, PP is absolutely not the victim. They are always in the media spewing their propaganda about “protection” and “education” when in reality their primary goal is to sell abortions. Don’t believe me? Go to your local PP (heck, go to several just to help me prove my point) and tell them you’re pregnant and confused. See what “choices” they offer you. I dare you. I think its disgusting that my tax dollars support an organization that manipulates scared girls/women into killing their children while misrepresenting the facts about the procedure. Don’t believe that either? Make sure to ask them some fact based questions about the procedure and about the baby, then do a little research on your own. It’s all bologna! Everything they say is bologna. They’re trained to sell abortions. Period. What’s worse is it’s not necessarily the volunteers/employees fault. They’re fed the same propaganda as they feed the women who walk through their doors. Shame on them for not checking the facts, but if I were told a “fact” by someone I deemed reputable, I suppose I’d probably believe it too. Anyway, PP isn’t the one on the chopping block here, Focus on the family and Tim Tebow are. But since they were brought into the discussion, I wasn’t going to let them come of looking like a hero. They’re disgusting.

Back to the matter of free speech being treated equally, I don’t hear people protesting PP constantly being in the media, but I do hear people upset about this Focus ad. It seems to me that the pot is calling the kettle black. And it’s so common these days. That was exactly the point of my previous entry on tolerance. Tolerance is not one directional. If you’re an advocate of free speech, you should be thrilled about this ad, whether you agree with it’s content or not. You should be thrilled that CBS made a decision in FAVOR of free speech. Focus paid their $2 million, just like Budweiser and Geico and Doritos. Therefore they get a commercial spot. If CBS had taken the stance NBC took last year when banning a pro-life ad with the theme, “Life. Imagine the possibilities.” then free speech advocates should be angry. The network shouldn’t judge commercials on content other than deeming them appropriate for the viewing audience in terms of those little viewer rating things. For example, if the Superbowl has a Y7 rating, the commercials should too. Other than that, free speech supports the right for this or any other commercial to air. Don’t hop on the free speech bandwagon if you don’t really mean it. Free speech extends to those you agree with and those you do not. It’s not a matter of “money talking.” Anyone who wants to spend the $2 million on 30 seconds of air time can and should, regardless of the message. (Again, assuming it is of the same “rating” as the show. It would be totally inappropriate to have a “mature” ad come on during a family broadcast.  Ads should be “rated” the same as the tv shows for the children’s sake.)

Regarding “divisive politics” and their place among Superbowl ads…man, what a sad statement. It is so sad to be reminded that the thousands of women who are hurt and babies who are killed daily are reduced to nothing more than a statistic, a talking point and something we don’t want to think about when we’re trying to have fun at a Superbowl party. These are real people, real women and real babies. This is not about pro-choice or pro-life. This is about real people who are manipulated or poorly educated before making a life-altering decision. These are real women who suffer for the rest of their lives. Women who are 6 times more likely to take their own life in the year after having an abortion. Women who are 138% more likely to suffer major clinical depression 8 years later as compared with women who carry unexpected pregnancies to term. Women who are 4 times more likely to develop a substance abuse problem despite the fact that they have never had one prior to the abortion. Nevermind the 1 in 100 women who have severe complications (like uterine perforations, lacerations, blood loss, infections, blood clots, and other complications) from their abortion and 1 in 116,00 that die. Abortion is an ugly beast that we allow to kill children and destroy women, yet we can devalue its presence to mere “politics” to avoid feeling a little uncomfortable about what we allow or even outwardly support.

I think that discomfort is what this all boils down to. Although I obviously haven’t seen the commercial yet, there’s nothing offensive about it. A 30 second story about the “fetus” that wasn’t supposed to make it but did should be heart-warming. Why isn’t it in this case? Because of that discomfort. If Tim Tebow wasn’t supposed to make it and did, how many more stories could there be just like that? How many women listened to their doctors and terminated a pregnancy potentially for no reason? That makes us feel uncomfortable. Especially since a favorite argument of the politically correct pro-choice individuals is “what about cases of medical necessity, incest or rape?” Well, you can put your mind at ease. Those cases only account for 1% of all abortions. So, yes, there are other women who were in Pam Tebow’s situation and may have made the wrong choice. However, the vast majority of women who abort do so for selfish reasons, not medical or horrific ones. Oh…wait. That makes us even more uncomfortable. Hmm…why could that be? Because abortion is wrong. Things that are right don’t need to be justified or rationalized. That discomfort you feel is your conscience. You may have gagged it and stuffed it in a box deep down inside you, but it’s still there. It’s still doing its job, ever so quietly, trying to get you to see the gross error in your logic.

All of this uproar has nothing to do with free speech, what Jesus would want, money, the Superbowl or anything else. The uproar is because something is happening that gives your conscience a little louder voice and you can’t stand it. You can’t stand how ill-at-ease you feel reading this, watching that commercial or being faced with a pro-life perspective of any kind. Instead of taking a long hard look at the way you feel and why you feel that way, at the things you believe and why you believe them, you just get mad. Since that anger has to have an outlet, you direct it at Christians or Focus on the Family or Tim Tebow, or whoever the closest target is at the time.

In reality, none of these people or organizations are responsible for your anger or can even do anything about it. If you wholeheartedly believed in abortion, if you honestly believed it’s something that every woman has the right to chose to do, you wouldn’t be so angry right now. You may feel sorry for those pro-life people or laugh at their opinion or be grateful that you’re more sophisticated than to believe in the sanctity of human life, but you wouldn’t be angry. You wouldn’t be so threatened by a 30 second ad that promotes life. You wouldn’t be discussing in on facebook, on radio call in shows and over lunch in the manner you’re doing. You wouldn’t care about it if it didn’t strike a chord with you. You’d just laugh at those silly, uneducated people that wasted $2 million on outdated ideas and be done with it. You’d spend the time you just spent arguing with me to save a tree or a dolphin or whatever else you value more than the right to life. This wouldn’t be such a controversial topic if you weren’t trying so hard to make sure everyone around you understands your justification and rationalization of this sick and disturbing practice.

You don’t have to fight for “the right to have an abortion”, women have that “choice” in this country. If you know you’re right, quit defending yourself. The Tim Tebow ad doesn’t even address a woman’s “right to choose,” it simply promotes the dignity of life and family. Life and family are both good things. This is a happy ad about a family with a happy ending. That’s not anything to be angry about.