EDITORIAL

Last July, Bishop Leonard Blair directed that in his Diocese of Toledo, Ohio, fundraising under Catholic auspices to combat breast cancer would no longer be directed to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation.

The bishop was concerned that the Komen Foundation was “open” to funding embryo-destroying stem cell research, and that it was an active financial contributor to Planned Parenthood, America’s largest purveyor of abortions. It is “morally unacceptable,” Bishop Blair correctly reasoned, to help fund the destruction of some human lives — through embryo-destroying research or direct abortion — in order to ostensibly save other lives. Instead, he directed such fundraising toward life-affirming efforts to combat breast cancer, such as “our locally known Mercy Cancer Centers” in Toledo.

So it was no surprise that early last week Bishop Blair, speaking from Rome during his region’s ad limina visit, joined the chorus of faithful Catholics and pro-life people across America in welcoming the Komen Foundation’s short-lived decision to stop its funding of Planned Parenthood.

Alas, it took only days for Komen to apparently reverse itself in the face of what Kevin Clarke, posting on America magazine’s website, aptly termed the “shock and awe” onslaught orchestrated by Planned Parenthood and its powerful, well-heeled allies — including New York’s pro-abortion Mayor Bloomberg, who immediately pledged a quarter-of-a-million dollars from his boundless personal fortune to prop up Planned Parenthood’s $1.1 billion annual budget. Indeed, media were reporting that overnight Planned Parenthood had received enough such donations to more than offset the projected loss of Komen funds — leaving one to wonder exactly why it is necessary for Komen to add any of its limited resources to Planned Parenthood’s megabucks, especially given that among the millions of Americans who contribute to breast cancer research are many who are pro-life, and do not want any more of their money going to support the nation’s (already taxpayer-funded) leading abortion provider.

In addition — in a development not widely reported in mainstream media — Komen Foundation founder and CEO Nancy Brinker told reporters that donations to that organization had increased 100 percent in the two days following their announcement that they would end funding for Planned Parenthood. Will the organization now have the integrity to offer to refund such contributions, many of which undoubtedly came from pro-life people once they were assured that their money would not find its way into Planned Parenthood’s coffers?  

If, as Brinker stated last week, Komen is “singularly focused” on combating breast cancer, why would it divert funds to an organization that Brinker herself acknowledged does not actually do breast cancer screening?

“We were giving them money,” she said, “they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms.”

Although Planned Parenthood has been very misleading about this, Lifenews.com notes that an expose´ last March by the pro-life organization Live Action “revealed no Planned Parenthood centers nationally provide mammograms.”

“Even in their own press statements,” notes the National Right to Life Committee, “Planned Parenthood states that they refer for mammograms, an indication they don’t perform them.

“Planned Parenthood is not in the business of fighting breast cancer,” NRLC clarifies; “they’re in the business of performing abortions to the tune of more than 300,000 a year, which accounts for at least one-third of Planned Parenthood’s nongovernmental clinic income. In fact, Planned Parenthood has announced that all of their affiliates will be required to perform abortions.”

(TLIC’s emphasis)
Which brings us to the question of credible research suggesting a link between abortion and breast cancer, as well as some oral contraceptives and breast cancer. Shouldn’t an organization that is “singularly focused” on combating breast cancer be committed to pursuing research into all the disease’s possible causes? Can we plausibly believe, given its financial ties to the nation’s leading purveyor of abortion and contraception, that Komen will objectively promote research into a possible link between abortion, contraception, and breast cancer?

Some pro-life groups have noted an ambiguity in the Komen Foundation’s latest statement, suggesting that they are still neither fully comfortable with, nor fully committed to, future funding of Planned Parenthood. So we should all let Komen’s leaders know (news@komen.org) that our future support will depend on the organization living out its “singular focus” of combating breast cancer, and ending its financial support for the nation’s leading abortion provider.

In the meantime, we might all follow Bishop Blair’s lead, and direct our own financial support to organizations that devote all their resources to life-affirming breast cancer research, treatment and prevention.