Tuesday, March 19, AD 2024 4:14am

Susan G. Komen Supports Abortion Still

[Updates at the bottom of this article as of 8:31pm CDT AD 9-30-2009 shows alternatives  –other than Komen– for fundraising activities related to Breast Cancer research that are Pro-Life in their outlook]

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure (Komen) is an organization that funds breast cancer research.  This noble effort by Komen to save the lives of both women and men who are afflicted with breast cancer is tainted by their funding of abortion via Planned Parenthood.

Each year Catholics and most other Christians raise their concerns about supporting Komen specifically because Komen donates money to Planned Parenthood.  Catholics and most other Christians unknowingly assist Komen in their fundraising efforts which goes against the teachings of Jesus as stated in the Fifth Commandment of “You shall not kill”.

Due to this criticism attributed to Komen in funding abortion, Komen released an open letter in March 2009 concerning their relationship with Planned Parenthood.  In this open letter they defended their donations to Planned Parenthood raising three (3) reasons why it is acceptable to continue to donate money to Komen even though they provide funding to abort innocent unborn children.

I will address their open letter with their three (3) reasons here:

1.  Komen does so much good that it’s ok to fund abortions.  The good outweigh the bad.

My response:

It’s absurd to suggest that we should support Komen because they do so much good, even if we disagree with their involvement with Planned Parenthood.  There are many other cancer charities which do no get involved with Planned Parenthood and do not actively support embryonic stem cell research (ESCR). The Holy See has made similar decisions with regard to UNICEF and Amnesty International.

The means do not justify the ends.

If you want a philosophical explanation concerning Natural Law and the Principle of Double Effect click here.

2.  Two dissident Catholic ethicists provide cover to participate in Komen.

My response:

Ron Hamel, Ph.D., and Michael Panicola, Ph.D. are theologians with a focus on defending forbidden research and treatments, they are involved with the Catholic Health Association USA which is endorsing and defending ObamaCare.  They have come out in support of ESCR as long as the Catholic researcher doesn’t personally slaughter the unborn to extract the cells.

Pope Benedict XVI released an instruction, ie, a teaching from the Magisterium, addressing this specific issue of abortion and ESCR in Dignitas Personae (DP 23) the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth. Therefore, the use of means of interception and contragestation fall within the sin of abortion and are gravely immoral. Furthermore, when there is certainty that an abortion has resulted, there are serious penalties in canon law.”

Basically Hamel and Panicola are not the Catholic Church when it comes to her teachings.  We as Catholics abide by what Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium teaches.  Hamel and Panicola are making themselves out to be a parallel magisterium that does not exist anywhere in the Catholic Church.

3.  No evidence between breast cancer and abortion or birth control pills.

My response:

There are strong links between abortion and breast cancer, especially when involving young women who have never given birth to a child, there’s also some indicators that birth control pills are a problem as well (note that hormone therapy for the treatment of menopause has been banned because of the breast cancer link, it seems a short leap to birth control pills).  Part of the problem is that groups like Komen seek to suppress this research because of their political views on abortion and birth control.  Also, even if abortion didn’t cause breast cancer it does cause the death of an unborn child, so this argument should not really carry any weight for Catholics.

I hope this addresses the concerns of Catholics and other Christians in not supporting the Susan G. Komen for the Cure, regardless of how much good they do, the putting to death of innocent unborn children can never be justified.

(Biretta Tips: Matt McDonald and Karen Richards)

_._

Update I: The following three (3) organizations are excellent alternatives for fundraising activities related to Breast Cancer research that are Pro-Life in their outlook:

1. Breast Cancer Prevention Institute

2 The Polycarp Research Institute

3. Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

0 0 votes
Article Rating
39 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
DarwinCatholic
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 11:32am

It might be worth pointing out that their argument you summarize in 1) seems to be not that they do other good things and so funding abortion is okay, but rather that the funds they are giving to Planned Parenthood are specifically and only for cancer screenings, not for abortions or “family planning services”. Their claim is that only Planned Parenthood has a large enough network of locations in rural and low income areas for their screenings to be available to everyone.

Now, I think there are two legitimate questions in regards to this:

1) Does Komen’s funding of these programs free up other funds at PP for use on abortions and birth control?

2) Is it simply unacceptable to work with PP for any cause, given how morally reprehensible their primary line of work is?

I’m not sure if 1) is a problem in this case or not, but I do think that 2) is a problem, and it strikes me as a good reason not to support the Komen foundation. If we’re serious about how bad we think Planned Parenthood’s main business is, using them as a handy provider network for some other service is kind of like using the mafia to deliver packages — the fact that your particular activity is innocent doesn’t excuse providing business to such a reprehensible organization.

Christina
Christina
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 11:34am

Even the World Health Organization and the Mayo Clinic (hardly pro-life institutions) recognize the synthetic hormones used in the Pill and hormone replacement therapies as human carcinogens.

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 11:41am

Darwin,

Excellent points.

Komen uses PP because of their network, but nowhere do they (or PP) say how those funds are used. Though any support to PP is wrong to begin with.

I think your two point are intertwined to the threshold that regardless of how you argue point 1, it is negated by the simple fact that they are PP, ipso facto, provide abortions is never a good thing.

I like your analogy about the mafia, no matter how effective they are, using the mafia is never a good thing.

Christina,

Thank you for your points.

I wanted to post this as soon as possible. The more I researched on my post the more links I was able to find so I had to stop somewhere or I would be posting a dissertation paper in the end! 😉

cminor
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 11:47am

I’m glad you mentioned #3. While many doctors unfortunately seem to still cling to the “there’s no evidence” reasoning, there is much reason to suspect otherwise.

The clinical upshot is that the Komen foundation may be shooting themselves in the foot through these contributions. And there are other organizations that support breast cancer research that do not make such contributions. Why the rush to promote this organization when others exist that do the same good work without the baggage?

A side note: My youngest child was born in Germany. When I made contact with the doctor who provided my care for that birth, I observed that during my initial health questionnaire I was asked if I had ever terminated a pregnancy. The question, which was subsequently repeated over the next three years each time I visited for well care, intrigued me as no health care practitioner in the U. S. had ever asked me that question (or has, since.) I’m sure it wasn’t an idle question; had I answered yes it might have made a difference in my treatment (more or earlier testing, maybe?) Unfortunately, I never got up the nerve to ask why it was a concern.

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 12:02pm

DarwinCatholic,
It might be worth pointing out that their argument you summarize in 1) seems to be not that they do other good things and so funding abortion is okay, but rather that the funds they are giving to Planned Parenthood are specifically and only for cancer screenings, not for abortions or “family planning services”. Their claim is that only Planned Parenthood has a large enough network of locations in rural and low income areas for their screenings to be available to everyone.

We’re actually responding to the “Catholic ethicist” claim here, not their defense of using PP:
“The good that Komen does and the harm that would come to so many women if Komen ceased to exist
or ceased to be funded would seem to be a sufficiently proportionate reason”

Nick
Nick
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 12:09pm

This is a timely post for me.

The principal of my children’s parochial school asked my wife and I to come with an alternative to Komen when we informed her about the link between Komen and PP. The children have had fundraisers in the past with proceeds going to Komen. I have not had any luck so far finding a suitable pro-life breast cancer research charity that I can recommend. Any ideas?

Mike Petrik
Mike Petrik
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 12:28pm

Nick,
While not a perfect substitute, you might consider researching this option: http://www.bcpinstitute.org/home.htm
Cheers,
Mike

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 12:28pm

Hi Nick,

did you check here:

http://www.nationalbreastcancer.org/

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 12:36pm

Nick,

I just got off the phone with the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer and they recommended the following:

Breast Cancer Prevention Institute:
http://www.bcpinstitute.org/home.htm

The Polycarp Research Institute:
http://www.polycarp.org/

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer:
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/abc.html

The first two actually do research to prevent breast cancer and the last one analyzes and dissects the information of all research done on breast cancer and disseminates the information (even the information suppressed by Komen and Planned Parenthood).

I’ve also updated the article to show these links.

Mike,

Excellent link!

American Knight
American Knight
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 1:03pm

Thanks for drawing attention to this.

The absurdity of the argument is glaring. I saved 10 men from drowning last week, so it must be OK for me to drown one this week.

I feed hundreds of poor people out of my own stores so it must be OK if I want to starve one child to death in my basement for amusement.

What kind of warped thinking makes this irrationality seem plausible?

I notice the Shirner’s (freemasons) have hospitals for children, while they promote a Luciferian agenda. So is it OK for them promote Satan becuase they have hospitals for kids?

Is it OK for me to support the Shriner hospitals knowing that frees-up resources to promote Satan’s agenda?

I guess there’s nothing wrong with a teeny, little compromise with evil along as everything else I do is good right?

No wonder Glenn Beck has blood shooting out of his eyes!

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 1:08pm

No wonder Glenn Beck has blood shooting out of his eyes!

Exorcism?

NancyD
NancyD
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 1:10pm

I am so glad you mentioned the link to breast cancer. You said, “note that hormone therapy for the treatment of menopause has been banned because of the breast cancer link, it seems a short leap to birth control pills…” It is a very short leap. Research on synthetic hormones, specifically progestin, is directly related to an increase of breast cancer. Planned Parenthood and even the Mayo Clinic do not share any of the research findings on this subject. If I were a researcher, I’d search for statistical data linking the increase of breast cancer to the advent of the birth control pill.

American Knight
American Knight
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 1:19pm

Excosrcism?

:rofl:

c matt
c matt
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 2:18pm

The letter itself only says the studies have not shown there is a conlcusive link between abortion and breast cancer – typical weasel words. Very few, if any, studies show a conclusive link between anything. In fact, even lung cancer studies don’t claim a “conclusive” link between smoking and lung cancer. That is such BS.

Anyway, I am glad they came up front about their involvement with PP. I was always suspicious of a link, and now we know.

As for the mafia analogy, I suppose it would be like donating to a “feed the hungry” organization that pays rent to mafia owned/run brothel network to use as a soup kitchen during the day. And every dollar of rent from the hunger organization frees up a dollar for running the brothel.

c matt
c matt
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 2:21pm

and the Catholic ethicist argument is a joke.

c matt
c matt
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 2:31pm

Tito:

At least as I read it, argument 3 is not that there is no evidence of link, but that there is no conclusive evidence. In fact, they concede there is some evidence since they refer to the “bulk” of studies, though not clearly defining what a “bulk” is – 55%, 60%, 70%? Even if it was 80%, that means 20% of the studies showed a link, hardly a factor any prudent person would ignore. Do you think if 20% of studies showed high caffeine intake was linked to breast cancer, that the Foundation wouldn’t be screaming it from every corner?

So while their claim may be literally true (bulk of studies show no conclusive link) it is completely misleading when talking about risks. It just shows they are more concerned about maintaining ties to PP than to actually exploring ways to reduce breast cancer.

bearing
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 7:37pm

Great article and thanks especially for the links to organizations that Catholics can donate to…

When you get a chance, see if you can figure out where to donate money to fight Parkinson’s disease that doesn’t fund ESCR.

cminor
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 7:37pm

Based on what I’ve read, interpretation of some of those study results is kinda subjective. In any case, there’s often a disconnect between what the paper reports and what the press says about it. If you recall that far back, C. Everett Koop’s public remarks about why he didn’t think a new study on post-abortion syndrome would be useful was widely interpreted by the media as “Koop says there ain’t no such!”

Tito Edwards
Wednesday, September 30, AD 2009 7:59pm

CMinor, C Matt, et al,

Thank you for vetting my article.

I believe we can all agree that organizations such as Komen and Planned Parenthood have done for more to hurt women than to help (if any).

They continue to block most research that shows connections between abortion and breast cancer (as well as birth control pills).

What they do reeks of impropriety when they stonewall this research (and petty to say the least).

Nick
Nick
Thursday, October 1, AD 2009 12:00pm

Thanks to everyone for the various leads!

saynsumthn
saynsumthn
Thursday, October 1, AD 2009 12:03pm

You exposed the Komen Hypocrisy. They LOVE abortion, and they fund it PERIOD! There has been a new film about Planned Parenthood, called Maafa21. You need to see it http://www.maafa21.com

The one who knows
The one who knows
Monday, October 12, AD 2009 2:16pm

Its okay if they support Abortion. Really, Its the choice of the person who gets the abortion. Not everyone else. Abortion can be a good thing. Because if the person doesn’t have any money to support the baby then the baby will die of a diease due to lack of healthcare. Cause now a days doctors could careless about you if you don’t have healthcare. So why not support abortion??? Let it be done right instead of being done half assed. Donate money into doing an abortion the right way.

Eric Brown
Monday, October 12, AD 2009 2:50pm

There is so much one could say here, but I will restrain myself. The handle ‘the one who knows’ could not be more ironic. I think it requires great intellectual confusion to think that abortion can ever be done “right.”

Dave
Dave
Friday, October 16, AD 2009 11:18am

The Komen letter points out that some affiliates grant money to PP (not all affiliates). Do you know which ones? I’ve reveiwed the grants that my local Komen affiliate has donated and none of it goes to any organization associated with abortion.

The national organization only funds research. It’s the local affiliates that fund breast health and screening programs. If you want to stop Komen from funding PP then identify the affiliates fund Planned Parenthood and put pressure on them.

I will support my local Komen affiliate because I know where their funds are spent.

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Friday, October 16, AD 2009 11:26am

Dave,

so you would fund your local KKK as long as none of the money went specifically to fund lynchings?

Beyond the specific funding aspect, this is a matter of not affiliating with organizations which support evil. Komen supports evil (fetal stem cell research, and abortion), they also suppress information which would save women from breast cancer (abortion and contraceptive links) in order to appease their evil associates at PP.

John
John
Friday, October 16, AD 2009 4:32pm

This month I was inital taken aback by seeing my favorite NFL players decked in pink! I understand that this was support in breast cancer awareness month. Actually after the NFL unofficially told Rush Limbuagh to take a hike this week I think they should adopt pink as the official color of the NFL. Apparently welcoming the Susan Komen foundation is OK. Giving international recognition to this organization that lies to women about the logical risk relationship between terminated pregnancies through abortion and breat cancer is OK but welcoming a conservative businessman whose character was lied about in the media is not OK. But I am sure that the $805,000 given to Planned Parenthood by SBK affiliates will only be used for breast screening.

foxfier
Tuesday, October 20, AD 2009 11:19am

Somehow, I managed to miss this article and only found it via google…. Very timely, since they also just disinvited all Israeli doctors from the international conference SGK is having in Egypt.

I think you might appreciate my mom’s response: “There is no disease I could possibly have that would make it alright to chop up babies.”
(She ends up using many variations on it, since folks folks tend to make set assumptions. Bonus, she’s got a BS in animal husbandry, so generally knows more about fetal development than the ESCR supporters.)

Unbelievable
Unbelievable
Friday, January 29, AD 2010 7:29pm

Hey Foxfier,
Ever watched your mom suffer in intensive care for three months and die a horrible death from breast cancer ? Very insensitive comment. I have and until you live threw this stop pissing on Komen people. What is the Catholic church doing to help out? Hopefully one day one of your family members will be cured due to research from the Komen foundation. I bet you will not refuse treatment.

foxfier
Friday, January 29, AD 2010 7:48pm

Hey, Unbelievable, you have a child?

You want insensitive?
Try insisting that chopping up babies is a valid cure for suffering to someone holding their baby…which is what you just did.

Apparently, you flunk at basic reading comprehension, too, because you failed to realize: I quoted my mother. Who has breast cancer.

All that aside, “insensitive” is no reason for someone to fail to state a needful truth: embryonic stem cell research requires the deaths of thousand upon thousands of children, on the off chance that there may, some day, be some sort of a cure.

As a bonus, those pushing for ESCR routinely attack adult stem cell research, which is not only a proven science that dodges the killing people issue, but which can be done with body fat in some cases.

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Friday, January 29, AD 2010 7:59pm

Unbelievable I watched my mom die a painful death from breast cancer. She would have preferred a thousand such deaths rather than have an innocent child sacrificed to save her life.

Sierra
Sierra
Thursday, April 15, AD 2010 2:30pm

I am very pro-life, and I send an angry e-mail asking what exactly they do to support abortion. Somebody e-mailed me back saying they gave money to abortion centers that gave cheap mammograms for poor women who couldn’t get proper check-ups. I think that they can tell them to not put any of the money they donate to abortions, but Susan G. Komen decides not to do that. The money goes to the abortion centers in general.

Mike Petrik
Mike Petrik
Thursday, April 15, AD 2010 3:21pm

I have no idea what SGK does or does not do vis-a-vis PP. But I do know that Sierra is correct that SGK certainly can make earmarked contributions if it wishes. Whether such earmarked gifts would actually solve the moral question is less clear to me given the fungibility of money. While I would probably refrain from making contributions even under this scenario, I would not be confident in asserting the existence of a moral problem. Moral rules must be applied to facts, and often the rules are easier to come by.

Tito Edwards
Thursday, April 15, AD 2010 6:56pm

Mike & Sierra,

It’s called compromising with evil.

Foxfier
Friday, April 16, AD 2010 12:15am

Darkly amusing: a run for SGK this week in the Tacoma area is using a tagline something like “because everyone deserves a life.”

PB
PB
Saturday, June 12, AD 2010 10:08am

Please don’t speak for “most other Christians” without citing references. I can’t speak for “most other Christians,” but I can speak for myself as a Christian and tell you that I appreciate discussions that are both moral and factual at the same time rather than opinions through a megaphone. Saying something louder or attributing an opinion to a larger group doesn’t make it right.

really don't like pink
really don't like pink
Sunday, June 20, AD 2010 12:32am

Just found out no PP has any breast imaging equipment. The vans are scheduled and it cost $220.00. It’s $60.00 for a manual exam and that is not by a Dr. There might be a sliding scale but like was written earlier, do you have to be without anything? I don’t know.
A few years ago $475,000.00 was given to one of the Dallas PP facilities so that it would not close down. That is just one of many donations…there are many in each state. So, with no imaging equipment…it makes no sense.
Nancy Brinker (Brinker International—Chili’s, Macaroni Grill, On the Border etc.) started SGK when her sister Susan G. Komen died of breast cancer. I am sure this was very tragic for her. Her husband Norman Brinker helped fund the start-up of Komen. Nancy Brinker was and maybe still on the PP board. She is a card carrying member of PP. She is a believer in PP and all that it stands for. The monies will continue to flow from this cash cow for contraception, Embryonic stem research and PP.
There is a reason Komen exists…watch Maafa 21.
Ever wonder why so many Proctor and Gamble products have the “pink”? Dr. Gamble worked with Sanger in the early 1900’s is what my search revealed.
Folks walk, feel good and think they are doing good. The PP part does not matter—-what matters is how I feel right???
As far as I am concerned Nancy Brinker and her organization Susan Komen has made pink a very ugly color.
My mother had breast cancer.

really don't like pink
really don't like pink
Sunday, June 20, AD 2010 1:06am

Just found out no PP has any breast imaging equipment. The vans are scheduled and it cost $220.00. It’s $60.00 for a manual exam and that is not by a Dr. There might be a sliding scale but like was written earlier, do you have to be without anything? I don’t know.
A few years ago Komen org. gave $475,000.00 to one of the Dallas PP facilities so that it would not close down. That is just one of many donations. There are many in each state. So, with no imaging equipment at the PP facilities for the Komen org. to say their donations to PP are for breast exams, it really makes no sense.
Nancy Brinker (Brinker International—Chili’s, Macaroni Grill, On the Border etc.) started SGK when her sister Susan G. Komen died of breast cancer. I am sure this was very tragic for her. Her husband Norman Brinker helped fund the start-up of Komen. Nancy Brinker was and maybe still be on the PP board. She is a card carrying member of PP. She is a believer in PP and all that it stands for. The monies will continue to flow from this cash cow for contraception, Embryonic stem research and PP.
After watching Maafa 21 I realized the reason Komen exists. I firmly believe that if Komen was legit it would not be as big.
Ever wonder why so many Proctor and Gamble products have the “pink”? Dr. Gamble worked with Sanger way back when is what my search revealed.
Folks walk, feel good and think they are doing good for breast cancer via the Komen org. The PP part does not matter—-what matters is how I feel right???
As far as I am concerned Nancy Brinker and her organization Susan Komen has made pink a very ugly color.
By the way my mother had breast cancer.

Oh and the European interest in terminated abortions. They acknowledge the link and tie abortions to insurance rates. The more abortions the higher the premium. You can do a search of Great Britain/abortion/breast cancer. An actuary figured all of this out around 1967.

cminor
Saturday, October 16, AD 2010 3:32pm

“Oh and the European interest…They acknowledge the link and tie abortions to insurance rates.”
Thanks for the info, RLDP. I’ve read that some countries with longer histories of legal abortion than ours have data to that effect. Wonder if women going in for legal abortions in those countries are told their decision will result in their premiums being jacked up? Or if taxpayers there realize how those abortions raise their tax burden?

cminor
Saturday, October 16, AD 2010 3:41pm

PB, if it’s the original post you’re referring to, please reread. It’s pretty clear that the statement refers to that group of Catholics and Christians whose concerns about SGK’s relationship with PP is leading them to drop support; it’s not a reference to everybody on earth who self-identifies as a Christian. Oh, and another good reason to reread is that there are actually a number of facts there (complete with linked references) that you seem to suggest were not. Might learn something.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top