Pro-Planned Parenthood Comments & My Response

So, I've been seeing many comments on other sites regarding Susan G. Komen pulling support from Planned Parenthood. I wanted to address some of what I have seen here.


One of the most common comments I see coming from the opposition is something like: 

"Now PP won't be able to provide mammograms for those that can't afford it otherwise."

There are many things wrong with this statement. I can speak with a bit of authority on this topic due to the fact that I am the supervisor of an outpatient imaging center that includes breast imaging (screening & diagnostic mammograms and breast ultrasound) 


First off, PP does not perform mammograms, they only refer to imaging clinics & hospitals. 


Secondly, regarding the price. Virtually all insurance plans cover, in full, a screening mammogram each year. In addition, you do not need a doctor's order for a screening mammogram (only study I know of that doesn't legally require a doctor's order)...just an appointment. For those who don't have insurance, almost any place that performs mammograms provides the more than $300 exam for less than $80. The uninsured price at the place I work is about $40. Also, many imaging sites provide "fairs" periodically where they offer free screenings.


Another commenter ignorantly stated: 

"If you "pro-lifers" want to actually embrace a TOTAL pro-life mentality, start organizing free rides for women to clinics where they can have their health checked over by qualified professionals."

My response was, "Many hospitals & non-profit charities offer free rides for women to the clinics/hospitals. All you have to do is ask the clinic/hospital you are considering going to &, if they don't offer sure a service, they can probably recommend or suggest one. Most of these places & charities cannot afford to advertise these services to the general public due to many people, who are perfectly capable of performing these tasks themselves or have family who can assist, taking advantage of them."


Several commenters have said similar things to what this person said:

"Anti-abortion groups want to deny women vital health care that is 97% of what Planned Parenthood does."

If PP was so determined to provide health care to women, then why won't they just stop performing abortions. If only 3% of what they do is abortions & that 3% is what is costing them the most loss of support, then, in all logic, they should give up the 3% for the 97%. From my observation, they must care very little for the health of women due to their reluctance to cease from performing the controversial & horrific act. 


Also, this statement makes a wild jump into a bizarre conclusion, that because Pro-Lifers are against organizations that murder babies, that somehow we want to deny women healthcare. It is nothing like that. In fact, quite the opposite. We want women to receive good, life affirming medical assistance.


A Pro-Life commentator made a good analogy. She said if a wonderful surgeon was found to be molesting children, would you just ignore that fact because he has a history & gift for saving lives? 


I heard a pastor once use another story to describe how a little evil goes a long way. His children wanted to watch a "R" rated movie. They begged him & said, "But, Dad, it's just a few bad words. There is nothing else bad in it." 


So, to demonstrate how just a little goes a long way, he made them a plate full of delicious looking brownies & placed them in front of his children. He told them all about how he made them. How he used the best ingredients, the pure cane sugar, the natural vanilla, the flour, the fresh eggs. And then, he told them of the secret ingredient. He added just a pinch of dog poop. They stared at him in horror & refused to eat the brownies. He replied to them, "But, it's just a little poop. There is nothing else bad in them." The kids got the point. 


It is the same with PP. Maybe only 3% of their productivity is the murder of children but it still spoils the whole organization. Is disgusts me to even type "maybe only 3% of their productivity is the murder of children." When did our society become so numb to & accepting of the killing babies? 

*****************UPDATE*****************

Susan G. Komen has reconsidered their policy & will continue supporting Planned Parenthood.

I urge you to use the email link above to express your disappointment with this change.

Susan G. Komen pulls support from Planned Parenthood

Wonderful, wonderful news! Susan G. Komen has pulled all support from Planned Parenthood & embryonic stem cell research.

Being that I work in an imaging clinic, it has been very awkward for me for the last couple of years avoiding every mention of contributing to SGK.

Sad to say, but according to this article, SGK has been inundated with emails & calls criticizing their pull of support but very few responses of thanks from the Pro-Life community.

I encourage everyone to contact SGK & express gratitude for their removed support of the murderous group. You can email them at news@komen.org 

*****************UPDATE*****************

Susan G. Komen has reconsidered their policy & will continue supporting Planned Parenthood.

I urge you to use the email link above to express your disappointment with this change.

"Planed Parenthood Urges Supporters to Report Places of Worship"

clipped from www.worldviewweekend.com Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri (PPKM) has asked its supporters, through Twitter, to "Report Personhood petition activity! Be our Eyes and Ears, particularly at and near places of worship! http://tinyurl.com/y9fxz5r The link leads you to page where people are directed to watch for efforts to collect signatures for a Missouri petition drive to redefine personhood. I am ambivalent about this effort from Planned Parenthood to watch places of worship. On the one hand it is a bit chilling to know that a taxpayer funded organization is using those funds to watch and report what they see in church (presumably by peering over that wall of separation). On the other hand, anything that gets pro-choicers to attend a church service can't be all bad. Maybe this is just a brilliant attempt to win some more souls.

Article Link: "Sherrif under fire for rejecting request"

clipped from www.onenewsnow.com

Sheriff under fire for rejecting request

A Texas sheriff is standing firm against the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which says he violated an inmate's constitutional "right" to an abortion.

"Well, [we were told] the county will have to take this inmate to the abortion clinic, transport her, and then you get into a situation of a guard hire and all the costs associated with that," the sheriff points out. "So I said, 'No. I don't think that's a proper use of county taxpayers' money.'"

Fowler did ask to have the inmate's case moved forward quickly, which did happen. She received five years probation and was released. But now the ACLU is demanding to know what the sheriff will do if a similar situation occurs in the future.

"My take on it is unless the legislature creates a law that requires a sheriff to take inmates to an abortion clinic, then I'm not gonna do it," he explains.

Article Link: "Good News: Court Rules in Favor of Pro-Life Student Expression"

clipped from www.citizenlink.org

Good News: Court Rules in Favor of Pro-Life Student Expression

A federal court has ruled that a New Jersey teen should not have been prevented from taking part in the national Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity.

The Bridgeton High School student was not allowed to distribute pro-life literature during non-instructional times or wear a red armband bearing the word "Life." School officials told her that public schools allowed nothing "religious."

David Cortman, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, said the ruling provides vital protection for free speech.

"When a student attends a public school, he or she retains their First Amendment rights, and that also pertains to religious speech," he said. "This particular school has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the state, and the highest teenage abortion rate in the state, and this young lady was being a faithful witness."

"Catholic Nurse Forced to Perform Abortion?"

clipped from www.creativeminorityreport.com

Catholic Nurse Forced to Perform Abortion?

The New York Post reports that a Catholic nurse from Brooklyn, New York is claiming that the hospital where she's employed ordered her to assist in a late term abortion or be fired.

Bosses told the weeping Cenzon-DeCarlo the patient was 22 weeks into her pregnancy and had preeclampsia, a condition marked by high blood pressure that can lead to seizures or death if left untreated.

But the nurse, the niece of a Filipino bishop, contends that the patient's life was not in danger. She argued that the patient was not even on magnesium therapy, a common treatment for preeclampsia, and did not have problems indicating an emergency.

She said she later learned that the hospital's own records deemed the procedure "Category II," which is not considered immediately life threatening.

Slightly more awful from a hospital called "Mount Sinai" named for the mountain where God gave Moses a list of commandments which included "Thou Shall Not Kill."

Health Care: "Health Care 'Change' You Shouldn't Believe In"

clipped from bighollywood.breitbart.com

Health Care ‘Change’ You Shouldn’t Believe In

While running for President, Barack Obama used the word “change” as his mantra. A lot of people thought he meant that in a good way.

They’re finding out they were wrong.

Recently, President Obama said one of the ways we (aka: the government) can cut back on health care costs is by denying medical care to old people. If you think that was heartless, check out the thoughts of Obama’s science czar. Apparently he’s for “forced abortions, mass sterilization, and a ‘Planetary Regime’ with the power of life and death over American citizens.”

This administration made a lot of promises it has broken.

When the government health care plans we already have are set to run out of money in a few years, there is no reason to assume this one would be any more efficient. Especially considering what a spendthrift Obama has been already.

The author went on to say:

"When the government has people dependent on a medical system it starts to treat them like property and tells them how to live. It also makes decisions on whether they live or die by telling them whether or not they will get an operation."

"The change Obama wants for America is fundamentally inhumane and dangerous. Real change begins next November when we clean house and start sending politicians home. Take away those who vote for his bills and he becomes a paper tiger with the words “One-Termer” on his forehead."

Politics: "Exclusive: Pro-Life Group To Target Members of Congress"

clipped from www.cbn.com

Exclusive: Pro-Life Group To Target Members of Congress

The Brody File has learned that the Susan B. Anthony List, a major national pro-life group, will begin an aggressive, new pro-active project that will target members of Congress who are not representing their pro-life districts properly.

"Votes do have consequence and this project is going to make sure we are not always on the defensive. We're going into districts where individuals are vulnerable and we're just going to make sure people know how these individuals have voted and what their record is."

"We're going to be assertive. We're going to be agressive and this is a new day in politics for the pro-life movement."

The Susan B. Anthony List will be targeting certain members of Congress who are out of step with their district on the life issue.

They believe the issue needs to be addressed right away because pro-life groups have all too often taken a back seat approach to getting involved early in congressional races.

There is a great video on the site.

I think this is a great idea for any political stance you have. It is important to know how your elected officials are voting & how the ones that may run for higher office are voting. And many, myself included, usually don't hear about how our specific Senator or Representative votes. I'm sure that info is out there but I'm not really sure where.

News/Politics: Obama to reverse embryonic stem cell research ban

I think that Obama has taken a list of all the things Conservatives support & is going down that list doing the exact opposite.

clipped from pewforum.org

Abortion Views by Religious Affiliation

the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, conducted in 2007 by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life, finds that most religious traditions in the U.S. come down firmly on one side or the other. Religious beliefs and practices also influence views on abortion; individuals exhibiting high levels of religious commitment are much more likely to oppose legalized abortion in all or most cases than those who are less-observant.

For an overview of the abortion debate in the U.S., public opinion trends, religious groups' official positions on the issue and more, go to the Pew Forum's abortion resource page »

Data on "Total U.S. Population" from October 2008 survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. All other data from the Pew Forum's U.S. Religious Landscape Survey.
For question wording, see the survey topline.

¹"Other Faiths" includes Unitarians and other liberal faiths, New Age groups and Native American religions.

I thought this was pretty interesting, & surprising in some cases.

I'm not really sure what the difference is between "Mainline Protestant Churches" & "Evangelical Protestant Churches" are, though. Must be a pretty big difference. If anyone knows, please let me know or if you can share a link to more info that would be great.. I'm interested in the differences between different religions & denominations.

clipped from www.cbn.com

N.D. House Move Could Ban Abortion

CBNNews.com - North Dakota lawmakers have approved a measure that would give fertilized human eggs the same legal rights as human beings, a step that could essentially ban abortion in the state.

The bill says that "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens" is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

"This is very simply defining when life begins, and giving that life some protections under our Constitution - the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

The bill also requires abortion practitioners to inform women that abortion kills a human being and that human life begins at the point of conception.

Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure Tuesday. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate.

Meanwhile, an Oklahoma House committee has cleared a measure to prohibit physicians from performing abortions solely on on the basis of a baby's gender.