Planned Parenthood can be a controversial organization to some but they do provide
health care to woman via breast exams, birth control pills, and planning- a good thing.
But today it was announced that susan g. komen is cutting funding to planned parenthood.
"The move was called, in some of the nicer assessments: “disgusting,” “anti-women,” and an “act of cowardice.” The president of Planned Parenthood said she couldn't understand how the nation’s leading breast-cancer charity “could have bowed to this kind of bullying,” alleging that the funding was cut because of pressure from anti-abortion groups.
Petitionswere also started that called for the partnership between Komen and Planned Parenthood
to be restored.
Komen for the Cure has been under fire before, a number of times. As Amanda Marcotte points
out in Slate, Komen was already “under serious scrutiny” by critics who believe
“the organization cares more about shoring up their image than making real progress
in the fight for women's health.”'
http://www.washingto...pm_national_pop
| Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions. |
0
More woman thrown under the bus.
Started by Shortpoet-GTD, Feb 01 2012 04:56 PM
cancer screening breast exams charity
46 replies to this topic
#2
Posted 01 February 2012 - 05:27 PM
I've been steaming about this all day. Planned Parenthood provides crucial, affordable health care services to women that are particularly important for low income women and those without insurance. How can we save the planet without saving the people who live on it? I already stopped supporting Komen a long time ago because I don't agree with their "pinkwashing" - I mean, making pink KFC buckets? Really? One of the unhealthiest fast foods you can get? That's just one example. Anyway, I've been heartened by the number of people in my social networks who have actually said they made their first donations to Planned Parenthood today. That's awesome.
#3
Posted 01 February 2012 - 05:55 PM
I am with you maria. Last fall I saw a pink breast cancer awareness logo on the signs a local lawn care company used to mark a lawn they had recently treated with pesticides and herbicides... the classic "keep children and pets off this lawn" sign.
That was really the last straw for me. How "aware" can Komen foundation claim to be about breast cancer if they are letting companies spraying known carcinogens use their logo?!
That was really the last straw for me. How "aware" can Komen foundation claim to be about breast cancer if they are letting companies spraying known carcinogens use their logo?!
#5
Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:00 PM
*high fives all around*
I have to say that there were also many sensible gentlemen who joined us in our disgust and took action on this issue.
So thank you to everyone who stood in support for women's access to affordable cancer screenings, helped push this issue into the limelight, and made Komen feel appropriately embarrassed by their decision.
I have to say that there were also many sensible gentlemen who joined us in our disgust and took action on this issue.
So thank you to everyone who stood in support for women's access to affordable cancer screenings, helped push this issue into the limelight, and made Komen feel appropriately embarrassed by their decision.
#7
Posted 04 February 2012 - 04:49 AM
Their reversal on grants is not the end of this story. (to be continued)-
http://www.msnbc.msn...6260055#VpFlash
http://www.msnbc.msn...6260055#VpFlash
#8
Posted 04 February 2012 - 05:15 AM
Take back the ribbon-
see the trailer -lies exposed in new movie.
http://front.moveon....rep=5&rc=tw.fol
"Karen Handel, a former GOP candidate who ran on a pro-life platform, shows her true colors.
She just happens to be Susan G. Komen’s Vice President of Public Policy now."
http://front.moveon....witter-retweet/
see the trailer -lies exposed in new movie.
http://front.moveon....rep=5&rc=tw.fol
"Karen Handel, a former GOP candidate who ran on a pro-life platform, shows her true colors.
She just happens to be Susan G. Komen’s Vice President of Public Policy now."
http://front.moveon....witter-retweet/
#9
Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:14 AM
"I've long had mixed feelings about Komen. Years ago, I edited Barbara Ehrenreich's "Welcome to Cancerland," so I was
well versed in "pinkwashing," i.e. corporations donating a miniscule fraction of the stuff adorned with Komen's pink ribbon
to cancer research, or holding a run (after which less than half of the proceeds go to "the cause," pre-overhead) rather than,
say, providing decent health care to workers or keeping toxins out of water supply.
I was also aware that Komen had threatened to sue other charities for daring to use "for the cure" in their marketing.
That Komen had denied the link between BPA and cancer (while taking in lots of money from BPA makers and users)
and generally prioritized "treatment" and "the cure" over "prevention."
But hey, Komen did "raise awareness," and when you're talking about a disease that afflicts 1 of every 8 American women,
maybe you take the good with the bad, right?
The board abandoned neutrality when, as part of a larger attack on Planned Parenthood that began with the
antics of conservative pseudo-journalist James O'Keefe, pro-life groups began targeting Komen for their PPFA grants.
They were assisted from the inside by new VP Karen Handel, who'd recently run for governor of Georgia on a pro-life
and stridently anti-Planned Parenthood platform, and who was brought on by former Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer.
The board of directors (not to be confused with Komen's multitudinous advisory boards) currently has nine members.
(listed on link)
Dig deep enough into Komen's financial statements, and you'll find that of the 24 percent they spend on research,
only 15 percent goes to explore how to prevent the disease."
http://motherjones.c...nned-parenthood
well versed in "pinkwashing," i.e. corporations donating a miniscule fraction of the stuff adorned with Komen's pink ribbon
to cancer research, or holding a run (after which less than half of the proceeds go to "the cause," pre-overhead) rather than,
say, providing decent health care to workers or keeping toxins out of water supply.
I was also aware that Komen had threatened to sue other charities for daring to use "for the cure" in their marketing.
That Komen had denied the link between BPA and cancer (while taking in lots of money from BPA makers and users)
and generally prioritized "treatment" and "the cure" over "prevention."
But hey, Komen did "raise awareness," and when you're talking about a disease that afflicts 1 of every 8 American women,
maybe you take the good with the bad, right?
The board abandoned neutrality when, as part of a larger attack on Planned Parenthood that began with the
antics of conservative pseudo-journalist James O'Keefe, pro-life groups began targeting Komen for their PPFA grants.
They were assisted from the inside by new VP Karen Handel, who'd recently run for governor of Georgia on a pro-life
and stridently anti-Planned Parenthood platform, and who was brought on by former Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer.
The board of directors (not to be confused with Komen's multitudinous advisory boards) currently has nine members.
(listed on link)
Dig deep enough into Komen's financial statements, and you'll find that of the 24 percent they spend on research,
only 15 percent goes to explore how to prevent the disease."
http://motherjones.c...nned-parenthood
#10
Posted 09 February 2012 - 04:04 AM
I know this thread I started was about koman/planned parenthood but the congress and many states
are trying their best to keep woman down=barefoot and pregnant.
All of current crop of candidates are against contraception, especially santorum.
(He voted 99 times out of 100-anti-choice.) He supports a national ban on abortions. He wants
to go back to the days of dirty coat hangers in the back alleys. He would ban abortions even
in cases of rape or incest.
gingrich would support defunding planned parenthood. (No breast exams for low income woman.)
romney is in lock step with the rest=anti-woman.
The personhood law they tried to pass failed in Mississippi, a conservative state.
All of these candidates are on the wrong side of this issue regarding woman's rights.
Polls show that even religious woman take the pill or use condoms.
99% of woman in this country have used contraceptives in their lifetimes.
I wonder if they realize it's the 21st century?
http://www.c-spanvid...rogram/304332-1
"Twenty-eight states already require health insurance plans to cover contraceptives. Eight of those states
require health insurance to cover contraceptives without exemptions even for churches, even for any sort of religious institution.
Even some major Catholic hospitals and Catholic universities that are not located in one of the 28 states required to cover contraception as part of their health insurance coverage for their employees do so.
Yes, there were Catholic voters in the last presidential election and there will be in this one, too.
But the majority of voters in the last election and probably in this one, too, the majority of voters are women,
and 99 percent of American women use or have used birth control, and 98 percent of the Catholic women use or
have used birth control.
People like being able to use birth control.
Where the White House is on this issue is here --
hey, women of America, under a Democratic president your birth control pills will be covered by health insurance,
and if you don`t have health insurance, you can go to a clinic and get subsidized birth control there.
If a Republican is elected president, on the other hand, your insurance may very well cover birth control and if your insurance doesn't cover it, or you don`t have insurance at all, there are no clinics to go to anymore to get birth control pills.
Planned Parenthood defunded.
And Title 10 which supports all sorts of family planning, it's the government money that`s subsidizing that stuff,
Title 10 gone altogether.
So you can't get it from insurance, and you can't get it from a clinic, which means you are paying cash out of pocket
retail cost for your birth control prescription.
So, on top of whatever else you are paying for your health care and your health insurance right now, American
women, plan another $600 to $1,200 a year cash outlay every year if you want to stay on birth control.
And that's if you're lucky, because if you`re not lucky, you're living in one of the states where birth control
has just been declared illegal.
So, do you want a Democratic president or Republican president, women of America?"
http://www.msnbc.msn...el_maddow_show/
are trying their best to keep woman down=barefoot and pregnant.
All of current crop of candidates are against contraception, especially santorum.
(He voted 99 times out of 100-anti-choice.) He supports a national ban on abortions. He wants
to go back to the days of dirty coat hangers in the back alleys. He would ban abortions even
in cases of rape or incest.
gingrich would support defunding planned parenthood. (No breast exams for low income woman.)
romney is in lock step with the rest=anti-woman.
The personhood law they tried to pass failed in Mississippi, a conservative state.
All of these candidates are on the wrong side of this issue regarding woman's rights.
Polls show that even religious woman take the pill or use condoms.
99% of woman in this country have used contraceptives in their lifetimes.
I wonder if they realize it's the 21st century?
http://www.c-spanvid...rogram/304332-1
"Twenty-eight states already require health insurance plans to cover contraceptives. Eight of those states
require health insurance to cover contraceptives without exemptions even for churches, even for any sort of religious institution.
Even some major Catholic hospitals and Catholic universities that are not located in one of the 28 states required to cover contraception as part of their health insurance coverage for their employees do so.
Yes, there were Catholic voters in the last presidential election and there will be in this one, too.
But the majority of voters in the last election and probably in this one, too, the majority of voters are women,
and 99 percent of American women use or have used birth control, and 98 percent of the Catholic women use or
have used birth control.
People like being able to use birth control.
Where the White House is on this issue is here --
hey, women of America, under a Democratic president your birth control pills will be covered by health insurance,
and if you don`t have health insurance, you can go to a clinic and get subsidized birth control there.
If a Republican is elected president, on the other hand, your insurance may very well cover birth control and if your insurance doesn't cover it, or you don`t have insurance at all, there are no clinics to go to anymore to get birth control pills.
Planned Parenthood defunded.
And Title 10 which supports all sorts of family planning, it's the government money that`s subsidizing that stuff,
Title 10 gone altogether.
So you can't get it from insurance, and you can't get it from a clinic, which means you are paying cash out of pocket
retail cost for your birth control prescription.
So, on top of whatever else you are paying for your health care and your health insurance right now, American
women, plan another $600 to $1,200 a year cash outlay every year if you want to stay on birth control.
And that's if you're lucky, because if you`re not lucky, you're living in one of the states where birth control
has just been declared illegal.
So, do you want a Democratic president or Republican president, women of America?"
http://www.msnbc.msn...el_maddow_show/
#11
Posted 14 February 2012 - 03:32 PM
The Blunt (it's blunt all right) Amendment.
Do the #gop really hate woman that much? This is unbelievable. No birth control. Period.
"In their latest move in the battle over contraception coverage, top Republicans in Congress
are going for broke: They're now pushing a bill that would allow employers and insurance
companies to pick and choose which health benefits to provide based simply on executives' personal moral beliefs.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the top GOPer in the Senate, has already endorsed the proposal, and it
could come to a vote this week. The measure would make the religious exemptions to President Barack Obama's health care bill so large they'd swallow it whole.
But Blunt's proposal doesn't just apply to religious employers and birth control. Instead, it would allow
any
insurer or employer, religiously affiliated or otherwise,
to opt out
of providing any health care services required by federal law—everything from maternity care to screening for diabetes.
Employers wouldn't have to cite religious reasons for their decision; they could just say the treatment
goes against their moral convictions.
That exception could include
almost anything—
an employer could theoretically claim a "moral objection" to the cost of providing a given benefit.
The bill would also allow employers to sue if state or federal regulators try to make them comply with the law."
(The amendment can be read in whole at the link.)
http://motherjones.c...ealth-insurance
No birth control of any kind for woman-this is the new #gop.
http://tpmdc.talking...on-coverage.php
Do the #gop really hate woman that much? This is unbelievable. No birth control. Period.
"In their latest move in the battle over contraception coverage, top Republicans in Congress
are going for broke: They're now pushing a bill that would allow employers and insurance
companies to pick and choose which health benefits to provide based simply on executives' personal moral beliefs.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the top GOPer in the Senate, has already endorsed the proposal, and it
could come to a vote this week. The measure would make the religious exemptions to President Barack Obama's health care bill so large they'd swallow it whole.
But Blunt's proposal doesn't just apply to religious employers and birth control. Instead, it would allow
any
insurer or employer, religiously affiliated or otherwise,
to opt out
of providing any health care services required by federal law—everything from maternity care to screening for diabetes.
Employers wouldn't have to cite religious reasons for their decision; they could just say the treatment
goes against their moral convictions.
That exception could include
almost anything—
an employer could theoretically claim a "moral objection" to the cost of providing a given benefit.
The bill would also allow employers to sue if state or federal regulators try to make them comply with the law."
(The amendment can be read in whole at the link.)
http://motherjones.c...ealth-insurance
No birth control of any kind for woman-this is the new #gop.
http://tpmdc.talking...on-coverage.php
#12
Posted 15 February 2012 - 05:16 AM
What is going on? This is 2012, right? You'd never know it by the laws they are passing against woman.
This would force woman to have an ultrasound probe inserted into their vagina, and it would force
doctors to perform this invasive procedure.
For a party that doesn't like big government, they sure are passing a lot of laws that are making
our government bigger and more communistic every day.
"A top Republican legislative leader in Virginia described abortion as a "lifestyle convenience" during the floor debate on a controversial measure to require trans-vaginal ultrasounds before a woman can get an abortion.
State Del. C. Todd Gilbert (R-Woodstock) made the comment midday Tuesday as the House of Delegates took up
consideration of the ultrasound bill.
The bill -- which then passed the House 63 to 36 -- would require any woman seeking an abortion in the state to receive an ultrasound first.
As an external ultrasound is not able to produce a necessary picture early in pregnancy,
a trans-vaginal
ultrasound would be needed to produce an image of the fetus.
Virginia legislators are expected to pass final versions of the ultrasound bill before the legislative session
ends in March. Lawmakers also passed the state's personhood bill today."
http://www.huffingto...?ir=DC#comments
This would force woman to have an ultrasound probe inserted into their vagina, and it would force
doctors to perform this invasive procedure.
For a party that doesn't like big government, they sure are passing a lot of laws that are making
our government bigger and more communistic every day.
"A top Republican legislative leader in Virginia described abortion as a "lifestyle convenience" during the floor debate on a controversial measure to require trans-vaginal ultrasounds before a woman can get an abortion.
State Del. C. Todd Gilbert (R-Woodstock) made the comment midday Tuesday as the House of Delegates took up
consideration of the ultrasound bill.
The bill -- which then passed the House 63 to 36 -- would require any woman seeking an abortion in the state to receive an ultrasound first.
As an external ultrasound is not able to produce a necessary picture early in pregnancy,
a trans-vaginal
ultrasound would be needed to produce an image of the fetus.
Virginia legislators are expected to pass final versions of the ultrasound bill before the legislative session
ends in March. Lawmakers also passed the state's personhood bill today."
http://www.huffingto...?ir=DC#comments
#13
Posted 16 February 2012 - 05:00 AM
Her coverage of the "forced vaginal probe" is after the bit on romney mistreating his dog.
Virginia-bob mcdonnell-new law he's trying to push. 
http://www.msnbc.msn...406410#46406410
Virginia-bob mcdonnell-new law he's trying to push.
http://www.msnbc.msn...406410#46406410
#14
Posted 16 February 2012 - 02:41 PM
Thanks for posting all of this. I had heard about the Komen/Planned Parenthood situation and have no fond thoughts for the Komen organization. The rest is some that I had not heard about yet (crazy couple of months has kept me out of the loop) and it's all appalling.
#15
Posted 16 February 2012 - 03:10 PM
"Three Democrats walked out of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on religious liberty
and the birth control rule on Thursday to protest Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) refusal to allow a progressive woman
to testify in favor of the Obama administration's contraception rule.
The morning panel at the hearing consisted exclusively of men from conservative religious organizations.
"What I want to know is, where are the women?" Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) asked Issa before walking out of the
hearing after the first panel.
"I look at this panel, and I don't see one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country
who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventative health care services, including family planning. Where are the women?"
Democrats say they tried to invite another witness -- a young woman -- to testify, but were blocked by Republicans."
(partial video on link)
http://www.huffingto..._n_1281730.html
and the birth control rule on Thursday to protest Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) refusal to allow a progressive woman
to testify in favor of the Obama administration's contraception rule.
The morning panel at the hearing consisted exclusively of men from conservative religious organizations.
"What I want to know is, where are the women?" Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) asked Issa before walking out of the
hearing after the first panel.
"I look at this panel, and I don't see one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country
who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventative health care services, including family planning. Where are the women?"
Democrats say they tried to invite another witness -- a young woman -- to testify, but were blocked by Republicans."
(partial video on link)
http://www.huffingto..._n_1281730.html
#17
Posted 17 February 2012 - 09:06 AM
Shortpoet-GTD, on 14 February 2012 - 03:32 PM, said:
The Blunt (it's blunt all right) Amendment.
Do the #gop really hate woman that much? This is unbelievable. No birth control. Period.
"In their latest move in the battle over contraception coverage, top Republicans in Congress
are going for broke: They're now pushing a bill that would allow employers and insurance
companies to pick and choose which health benefits to provide based simply on executives' personal moral beliefs.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the top GOPer in the Senate, has already endorsed the proposal, and it
could come to a vote this week. The measure would make the religious exemptions to President Barack Obama's health care bill so large they'd swallow it whole.
But Blunt's proposal doesn't just apply to religious employers and birth control. Instead, it would allow
any
insurer or employer, religiously affiliated or otherwise,
to opt out
of providing any health care services required by federal law—everything from maternity care to screening for diabetes.
Employers wouldn't have to cite religious reasons for their decision; they could just say the treatment
goes against their moral convictions.
That exception could include
almost anything—
an employer could theoretically claim a "moral objection" to the cost of providing a given benefit.
The bill would also allow employers to sue if state or federal regulators try to make them comply with the law."
(The amendment can be read in whole at the link.)
http://motherjones.c...ealth-insurance
No birth control of any kind for woman-this is the new #gop.
http://tpmdc.talking...on-coverage.php
Do the #gop really hate woman that much? This is unbelievable. No birth control. Period.
"In their latest move in the battle over contraception coverage, top Republicans in Congress
are going for broke: They're now pushing a bill that would allow employers and insurance
companies to pick and choose which health benefits to provide based simply on executives' personal moral beliefs.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the top GOPer in the Senate, has already endorsed the proposal, and it
could come to a vote this week. The measure would make the religious exemptions to President Barack Obama's health care bill so large they'd swallow it whole.
But Blunt's proposal doesn't just apply to religious employers and birth control. Instead, it would allow
any
insurer or employer, religiously affiliated or otherwise,
to opt out
of providing any health care services required by federal law—everything from maternity care to screening for diabetes.
Employers wouldn't have to cite religious reasons for their decision; they could just say the treatment
goes against their moral convictions.
That exception could include
almost anything—
an employer could theoretically claim a "moral objection" to the cost of providing a given benefit.
The bill would also allow employers to sue if state or federal regulators try to make them comply with the law."
(The amendment can be read in whole at the link.)
http://motherjones.c...ealth-insurance
No birth control of any kind for woman-this is the new #gop.
http://tpmdc.talking...on-coverage.php
I just find it remarkable that "moral objections" can be utilized for what is fundamentally immoral from a humanist standpoint. In essence this law is establishing that GREED is a moral conviction, and if your employer values their own profits over certain healthcare services, they are given an easy out to favor their greed.
Next thing you know, they will be legislating away the 40 hour work week and paid overtime. Afterall, we apparently should all just be grovelling in the dirt with appreciation for having a job... how dare we expect to be treated as a valued employee and asset.
#19
Posted 17 February 2012 - 03:31 PM
issa's favorite song?
American woman by guess who.
"American woman, stay away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come hangin' around my door
I don't wanna see your face no more
American woman, get away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come knockin' around my door
Don't wanna see your shadow no more
Go, gotta get away, gotta get away
Now go, go, go, I'm gonna leave you, woman
Gonna leave you, woman
Bye-bye, bye-bye, bye-bye, bye-bye
I'm gonna leave you, woman
Goodbye, American woman"
American woman by guess who.
"American woman, stay away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come hangin' around my door
I don't wanna see your face no more
American woman, get away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come knockin' around my door
Don't wanna see your shadow no more
Go, gotta get away, gotta get away
Now go, go, go, I'm gonna leave you, woman
Gonna leave you, woman
Bye-bye, bye-bye, bye-bye, bye-bye
I'm gonna leave you, woman
Goodbye, American woman"
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users