According to a blog over at the Village Voice, and also an update over at the Huffington Post:
Late in the afternoon, a Komen spokeswoman told reporters that breast cancer advocacy group had nothing to do with this so-called “Hope” pistol, and that the non-profit plans on sending a cease and desist order to Discount Gun Sales.
I would advise folks to not jump the gun (no pun intended) unless we receive word from DGS that they have, in fact, been ceased and desisted. As the article notes, Komen has taken money from gun related promotions in the past without issue, as they should. Organizations like Komen should be not be inserting themselves into political causes by not taking money from those kinds of people.
I am also interested in the content of said letter if and when it arrives. I believe Komen would be within their rights to demand DSG change “is proud to team up with the Susan B. Koman [sic] Foundation” which implies some form of partnership. If Komen merely demands that they change that language, they are merely asking that DSG clarify the lack of an actual partnership. I think it’s fine.
However, if Komen demands they remove any reference to their name, they are essentially saying they don’t want money from gun owners. If that’s the case, I will do my level best to make sure everyone within the reach of my voice gets the message. We’ll be more than happy to oblige.
To be clear, that doesn’t mean no longer supporting research into cures for breast cancer. That just means finding alternative organizations that don’t judge the donors by their personal decisions on self-defense, hunting, sport shooting, etc.
If they take this bait, they have not only become a political org, they have made it clear that breast cancer research is not their #1 priority. That now being left wing politics.
There’s always Planned Parenthood’s efforts for early detection and treatment….
I’m sure they could use the cash….
I’m with Sebastian and Bitter on this one. There are a lot of organizations out there supporting cancer research and support for cancer patients and their families. I found this out firsthand when my wife was dying from breast cancer back in 1993.
I don’t think all of them would be so narrow-minded as to not take money from gunnies without holding their nose.
While you’re at it….how about publicizing organizations that do research into prostate cancer? Statistically, about as many men die from prostate cancer as women die from breast cancer, and there are similar numbers of each who are diagnosed annually.
Arnold Palmer has an org that is probably the most prominent for prostate cancer.
It affects as many men as breast cancer does to women, but it does not get the press.
Sorry that DSG is getting Burned when they tried to help out. But I think that Komen’s getting trashed because they wanted to “distant themselves” from Planned Parenthood “until the “investigation is over,’ then caving in to the “Pro-Choice Wing” just causes me to scream “A Pox on Both their Houses!” Besides, Komen seems to think that they are the “Only One’s” who can use a Certain Color? And they Sue people who use it for something other than what Komen wants? And trying to force Planned Parenthood to Obey the Law by being Investigated, when this Administrations HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius used to get Huge Campaign Contributions from Late Term Abortionist Tiller back when she was killing RKBA Legislation as Governor of Kansas?
I think the Pro-Gun Community should make as many Donations to Pro-Gun Groups, or support those businesses and entities who are under attack by the Anti-Gun Groups, like Starbucks, who just want to sell Coffee. Selling Firearms to support Breast Cancer Research sounds good, but I’d rather the Proceeds went to the SAF or the NRA-ILA myself. Yes, I know DSG also thought they could draw some of the Breast cancer supporters into the Pro-Gun World, but it’s like me going to a MAIG Meeting and asking for Tax Abatements for Gun Shops. Just because the City could make some money doesn’t mean that the Uber-Liberals would be willing to do what’s right for their Communities.
Since reading this:
“The Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer charity has reversed its decision to halt funding of Planned Parenthood, the organization announced Friday.”
I feel that any funding to Susan G. Komen is also funding the killing of unborn infants and may be highly objectionable to many people and they need to know where their money may ultimately be going when given to Susan G. Komen.
I suggest Komen get a new PR outfit. Their current one is a disaster!!
In 2009, Planned Parenthood treated 11.4 million women — many of them low income. Here’s how that treatment breaks down by category:
35 percent for contraceptive services. There’s an estimate that this area of service may have prevented 600,000 unwanted pregnancies and 250,000 abortions.
35 percent for testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases and infections.
16 percent for cancer screening and prevention.
10 percent for other Women’s health services.
3 percent for abortions.
1 percent for other services.
So, by shutting down Planned Parenthood, one could theoretically prevent 330,000 abortions per year. I say theoretically, because I suspect that a number of those would be performed by other providers.
One would also deprive — for the most part poor and low income women, and some men — of needed health care services to the tune of 10.9 million interactions.
That’s a pretty big number. I’m not willing to lose that provider of health services. Then again, while I’m anti-abortion personally, I’m also Pro-Choice for two reasons:
I can imagine situations where an abortion is the best of a number of worse solutions, and I don’t think I should get to decide what everybody else in the country needs to live by.
I have faith in humans overall, to make the right decision, most of the time.
I haven’t been following the current Planned Parenthood stories, but I will say this: just as those abortions will theoretically be “prevented” if PP is shut down, so will those other services that are provided. Be it as it may, absolutely no Federal money should be going to this institution, because people shouldn’t be forced to support organizations they morally disagree with.
The Komen foundation is pleased to do what they will, but I have to agree with the sentiments that they are really messing things up for themselves!
I am opposed to abortion, because I can just as easily imagine situations where murdering a healthy person in cold blood is the best of a number of worse solutions, but I cannot support the legalization of first-degree murder.No, strike that: I’m an anarcho-capitalist. I support the legalization of everything. Which puts me in a very weird situation: being a pro-life anarcho-capitalist. It’s a contradictory position I haven’t fully reconciled.
And it also means that I think murder should be “legal”…because I have faith in humans overall, to make the right decision, most of the time…and once humans overall decide not to make the right decisions, no amount of government can save them from the bloody horror that will result.
The thing that really weirds me out about abortion is that just about every single justification made for it, can be used for the taking of the life of a healthy human being out of the womb.
(While L. Neil Smith’s point that there’s a difference between “sentient” beings–beings that can think, and “sapient” beings–beings that know they can think–rings true to me, his use of that point to justify abortion can just as easily be used to justify the murder of a six-month-old baby.)