The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Connie Schultz writes that poor women will be the victims of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation’s decision to cut ties with Planned Parenthood, in her column, Komen Caves To The Far Right — And Poor Women Pay:

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation has severed its ties with Planned Parenthood.

As a result, hundreds of thousands of dollars — nearly $700,000 last year alone — no longer will fund breast cancer screenings and other breast-related services for low-income and uninsured women at 19 Planned Parenthood affiliates across the country.

Poof! Gone.

Komen made the decision in December, but the news didn’t get out until this week. Before Komen went into lockdown mode, a spokeswoman told The Associated Press that this decision had nothing to do with the relentless pressure from anti-abortion groups that want to drive Planned Parenthood into extinction.

So why did an extremist anti-abortion group brag online about the funding cuts two weeks before Komen told Planned Parenthood?

On Dec. 2, 2011, Doug Scott, president of Life Decisions International, announced on its Facebook page that Komen was off its boycott list because it no longer was funding Planned Parenthood.

“Please keep in mind that if the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation deserved to be included in The Boycott List, it would still be there,” he wrote. “There is reason to celebrate. Just do not do it too loudly.”

That post has since evaporated.

Poof! Gone.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Wandrea "Shaye" Moss

YouTube Screenshot

Just who deserves protection in America?

If you observe the folks this country chooses to protect and chooses to ignore, you may get an answer that doesn’t exactly line up with America’s ideals.

Keep reading... Show less
YouTube Screenshot

The First Amendment reflects a principled but shrewd attitude toward religion, which can be summarized: Government should keep its big fat nose out of matters of faith. The current Supreme Court, however, is not in full agreement with that proposition. It is in half agreement — and half is not enough.

This section of the Bill of Rights contains two commands. First, the government can't do anything "respecting an establishment of religion" — that is, sponsoring, subsidizing or providing special favors for religious institutions or individuals.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}