Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood

The extortionists have gotten their way with their “Nice little Foundation you got here. It’d be a shame if anything, uh, untoward eventuated, now, wouldn’t it?”

I had not consciously boycotted Komen although I am pretty fiercely anti-abortion prolife (I oppose war and capital punishment, too). Its grants to Planned Parenthood did strike me as dubious, especially when I learned that Planned Parenthood provides essentially no mammograms (only a handful of local offices do). All it does is refer for mammograms, perhaps with a prescription for one. People support Komen to help eradicate breast cancer, for goodness sake, not to promote “women’s health” generally.

Komen’s handling of the matter, however, makes me likelier to consciously boycott in the future – for reasons you may not guess because the press seems not to have connected the dots. My impression is that:

  1. Komen’s original rationale for ceasing grants was that Congress (well, Congressional Republicans anyway) was investigating Planned Parenthood. That seems like a pretty lame reason unless Komen knew, from its own audits of grant recipients or something, that Planned Parenthood had misbehaved in the ways suspected by the Congressional watch dogs.
  2. Komen then changed its story, saying that it was ceasing most PP grants because there were more efficient means than funding PP (which, as noted, doesn’t actually do mammograms).
  3. Today’s course rehearsal reverts to version 1, confesses overreaction (to a mere investigation), and resumes funding (or at least the possibility thereof) in disregard of version 2.

So in the end, I’m disappointed:

  • that Komen can’t simply tell the truth, but instead waffles and dissembles. Why did they cease? Why did they resume? How much is Komen doing for breast cancer, really?
  • that Komen is going to take breast cancer prevention money and divert it to – well, exactly what is Planned Parenthood doing with Komen money?
  • that Howard Dean and numerous liberal Congressmen are thugs and extortionists, who think a breast cancer group is obliged to fund women’t health generally.
  • that the media is so utterly complicit, uninterested in the truth that PP is out-of-sync with Komen’s mission by not doing diddly-squat for cancer screening. I got as mad at NPR as I ever get during All Things Considered tonight, as they had one “expert” after another affirming that the original decision was a terrible mistake, that Komen must now do abject penance, and suchlike. (I couldn’t hear over the sound of my own screaming. Just kidding. The screaming was all in my head.)
  • that, in sum, this is another instance of the left shouting down its opponents, with the media as its amplifier, since reasoned discussion might be counterproductive to liberal ideology.

3 thoughts on “Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood

  1. I guess I can’t speak for anyone but myself; but I don’t think the Komen backlash was based primarily on the mere fact of no longer contributing money to Planned Parenthood; rather, it was the reason offered for the withdrawal, premised as a reaction to the doings of Congressional Republicans.

    1. That makes a certain amount of sense, and is somewhat congruent with my thought that the (first) reason was pretty weak.
      But I didn’t hear the press play up that angle. Their reactions (granted, there’s some selection bias in the sources I see) seemed to be “You can’t defund them! They’re wonderfulness incarnate! It will hurt women’s health! You can’t defund them! They’re wonderfulness incarnate! It will hurt women’s health! You can’t defund them! They’re wonderfulness incarnate! It will hurt women’s health!”
      All without explanation of how PP fits Komen’s mission without actually doing breast cancer screenings.
      I guess you’re too accustomed to tuning out media noise and focusing on the essential problem, which is the shifting rationales.

  2. Author’s note: Some new commenter visited and posted some challenging comments. Fair enough.
    Then he kind of went into time-delay, waiting days or longer to post again, and taking up new lines of challenge. It was a little creepy, as if he were stalking. He was obsessively incensed by my use of “extortion” and thought it was some kind of smoking gun that Komen staff and a Board Subcommittee reportedly recommended continued funding of Planned Parenthood before the Board voted the cut.
    This morning, days after his last preceding comment, he posted kind of a dismissive-insulting reply, to which I promptly replied in turn. Then (though I didn’t see it for hours) he cut loose with obscenities, telling me I was arrogant, a hypocrite (what I had said was a corporate governance commonplace – sheesh!), and unworthy to blog on topics like this.
    Sigh. It’s ironic since he considers himself some sort of “philosopher.”
    I have now taken down his comments – all of them – and my now-nosequitur replies to them. Comments are now closed. And this commenter won’t be appearing here again.

Comments are closed.