Planned Parenthood, contrary to their claims, does all they can to break down children’s natural modesty in order to get them addicted to sex. American Life League has done a masterful job at putting it all together.

H/T Jill Stanek

Q: Ms. Brinker, can you explain why you’re ending your longstanding relationship with Planned Parenthood?

Brinker: I don’t think that’s an entirely accurate depiction of what has happened. The Komen Foundation has provided funding to Planned Parenthood for the purpose of providing breast screenings. Planned Parenthood performs palpations of the breast, manually feeling for lumps. While these palpations discover lumps and result in mammogram referrals, they do not detect tumors in their most nascent stages. While we’re confident that Planned Parenthood will continue to perform manual exams as a part of their overall physical examination of women, the Komen Foundation is moving in the direction of funding actual mammograms.

Q: But what of the assertion by Planned Parenthood’s supporters that this move on your part will hurt women who will not be seen by Planned Parenthood?

Brinker: We’re talking about $600,000 of Komen money used to help offset some of Planned Parenthood’s costs. Our money represents six-tenths of one-onethousanth of Planned Parenthood’s one billion dollar per year operations. You’re not suggesting that Planned Parenthood is so mercenary that they wouldn’t pick up those exams on a pro-bono basis, are you? Besides, since our announcement, Planned Parenthood has raised more than the $600,000 that we have redirected to mammograms. If an organization can raise close to one million dollars in less than a week, then they no longer need our assistance. That represents a win for women.

Q: Yes, but aren’t you capitulating to anti-choice staff members for whom this is a proxy war over abortion?

Brinker: Don’t be absurd. I began this foundation in order to fulfill a deathbed promise to my sister, Susan, who was taken from us by breast cancer. As the head of a foundation that has raised nearly two billion dollars, I have a moral and ethical obligation to see to it that every dollar goes to advancing the highest caliber science, detection, and therapeutics for breast cancer.

Q: But…

Brinker: Please let me finish. Mammography requires the very best equipment and the very best radiologists to accurately interpret the images. This is simply beyond Planned Parenthood’s expertise and mission. We made a prudential decision to fund mammograms for women. Given Planned Parenthood’s demonstrated capacity this week to raise more money in three days than we give them in one year, I fully expect that as we expand our funding of mammography, Planned Parenthood will expand their manual breast screening and referral program. I just don’t see where women lose in this scenario.

Q: Are you concerned that corporations are threatening to cease funding Komen over this decision?

Brinker: Of course I am. I’m also mystified. We’re trying to fund an increase in the number of women who have the earliest detection of their breast cancer with the best possible outcome and for this we face withdrawal of support? I think you need to ask those corporate sponsors why they prefer we fund pre-mammography science as opposed to state of the art radiography.

Q: Perhaps these corporations see a value in Planned Parenthood’s services that you don’t?

Well, I see that you have a wedding band on your left hand, sir. So let me ask you this… If you had a choice of only one option, would you prefer that your wife receive annual manual exams at Planned Parenthood until a lump large enough to be palpated is detected, or would you rather she receive mammograms at state of the art centers, interpreted by experienced radiologists who could detect tumors too small to be palpated; tumors in their earliest stages where the disease is contained and the prognosis most positive? Our mission at Komen is to fund the very latest in science and technology, and this is way beyond Planned Parenthood’s current capacity, or even anything they could do in the near future.

Q: Getting back to the assertion by the anti-choice activists who have led the charge on efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, there are some who note Komen’s timing and the fact that you have anti-choice staff members. How do you respond?

Brinker: Our decision was not political, but prudential. We’re funding mammograms. However, let me say this. Whether or not a person is pro-choice or anti-choice, there have been a disturbing series of undercover videos of Planned Parenthood staffers acting with less than professional decorum. There are also investigations underway where Planned Parenthood has been advised that their answers may lead to self-incrimination. Now, perhaps these investigations are indeed politically motivated. That doesn’t mean that there may not be merit to the allegations being made. Time, and the process, will tell. We have decided not to fund organizations under investigation. In the case of Planned Parenthood, as I have said, their demonstrated capacity to raise in three days more money than we funded in an entire year really makes this a moot issue. Last Question…

Q: Going forward, assuming that Planned Parenthood is cleared of all allegations, will you resume funding them?

Brinker: This is beginning to resemble the movie, “Groundhog Day.” No, we will not. Given the economy, and given the fact that only about 10% of NIH research grant applications are being funded, there is no shortage of researchers who are desperate for research money. We live in the greatest country in the world, with the best medicine and best researchers. We are Susan G. Komen for the Cure, and that’s where our focus will remain moving forward. We excel at sponsoring the best current technology, and developing the next generation of technology. That’s where we need to be. With their newfound money, we’re delighted that Planned Parenthood will have the means to continue their breast screening program, even expanding it, and look forward to their referring women to the local mammography centers whom we’ll be funding. This is a win-win for women, folks. Let’s keep them as the focus, the women. Together, we’ll one day end this scourge. Thank You.

In the ongoing discussion about Komen funding for Planned Parenthood, it is essential that people understand the central issue, which is Komen funding an organization whose activities actually contribute to the incidence of breast cancer. One commenter on yesterday’s post, Dave Bunnell, left a very succinct statement with a perfect analogy to capture the essence of this debate. I thought it deserved its own post. Thanks, Dave. You’ve nailed it!

Reblogged this on The Bunnell Blog and commented:
Planned Parenthood’s activities increase breast cancer rate more than anything else Komen Foundation does decreases it. For Komen to give into PP’s campaign of lies and pressure to give them money would be like Mothers Against Drunk Driving letting Budweiser shake them down for funds.

Of the many incongruities arising from last week’s savaging of the Susan G. Komen Foundation by Planned Parenthood and its minions, the greatest single seeming incongruity is the disproportionate attack on Komen in light of the paltry sum of money involved.

Planned Parenthood is a $1 Billion per year organization who stood to lose $600,000 in Komen grant money. Organizations routinely loose that much money, and more when grants are not renewed, and they are organizations for whom $600,000 is the difference between life and death for the organization.

For Planned Parenthood, the loss of Komen funding represented 6/10 of 1/1000 of their budget. So what’s going on here?

It wasn’t the money at issue, it’s what Komen’s support means for the organization. Planned Parenthood makes their money performing abortions, mostly on young people. Former Planned Parenthood clinic director, Abby Johnson, tells of how the corporate model at PP was built around abortions.

The charade of concern for women’s breast health is the only socially acceptable vestige left for the organization’s bruised and tatttered reputation. Planned Parenthood performed manual breast exams and referred women to mammogram centers. In some instances, it appears that they paid for the mammograms.

However, Planned Parenthood lied about performing mammograms, and Lila Rose caught them in that lie.

Subsequently, Komen decided that their money would be better spent on paying directly for mammograms, and that’s when all hell broke loose.

Planned Parenthood has an odd way of demonstrating its concern for women’s breast health. They target teenagers with low-dose birth control pills which will fail in their contraceptive effect if not taken precisely on schedule, setting up a lucrative abortion. What the oral contraceptives will not fail in doing is increasing the risk of the deadliest and most aggressive form of breast cancer, triple negative breast cancer.

How much risk?

According to Dr. Louise Brinton of the National Cancer Institute in a 2009 paper, women whose age of first use is below 18 years old have a 540% increased risk. Is that statistic in any of Planned Parenthood’s literature?

The link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer has been known for decades, yet Planned Parenthood dispenses these dangerous drugs to children with reckless abandon.

PP are the lepers of the medical community. They have been caught:

Lying about performing mammograms.

Aiding in child sex trafficking.

Repeatedly showing willingness to violate mandatory reporting laws for statutory rape.

Violating informed consent by giving women medically inaccurate and fabricated information to coerce them into having an abortion.

Enthusiastically accepting money earmarked for aborting Black babies.

This is an organization that makes no distinction between a ten year-old and a twenty-four year-old regarding sex, contraception, and education. In their own words from page 10 of their booklet, Stand and Deliver:

The World Health Organization defines young people as those from 10 to 24 years of age, including adolescents (10–19 years) and youth (15–24 years). IPPF uses the terms young people, youth and adolescents interchangeably to refer to people who are between 10 and 24 years.

This is an organization that tells children in their booklet, Healthy, Happy, and Hot, that disclosure of their HIV status to a sex partner is not mandatory and just another ‘choice’:

You have the right to decide if, when, and how to disclose your HIV status.

There are many reasons that people do not share their HIV status. They may not want people to know they are living with HIV because of stigma and discrimination within their community. They may worry that people will find out something else they have kept secret, like they are using injecting drugs, having sex outside of a marriage or having sex with people of the same gender. People in long-term relationships who find out they are living with HIV sometimes fear that their partner will react violently or end the relationship.

Were all of that not enough, Planned Parenthood has outdone themselves in their latest document, Exclaim!, calling for the abolition of parental consent laws and calling for the sexual rights of ALL persons under the age of 18.

This is the face of a social parasite, of the destroyer of children, of the enormous parasitic organism who preys upon our sons and daughters. All they have left is women’s breast health as the last vestige of credibility, and without Komen, they are sunk.

It wasn’t the 6/10 of 1/1000 of their annual budget that was the threat, it was the loss of the borrowed credibility from Komen that threatened them.

As symbiotic relationships go, this one between PP and Komen is a textbook definition of parasitism. Not only does Komen not need the relationship with PP, but the association is an occasion for PP to engage in a blood meal, feeding off of Komen’s enormous reserves of credibility and good will in the community.

Brinker needs to point out the ugly reality of PP and cut the ties. It would also help if she gave the link between abortion and breast cancer, and the link between the pill and breast cancer their proper recognition.

As the head of the world’s premeir breast cancer foundation, she has an obligation to report the whole truth. If she doesn’t, she isn’t acting in women’s best interests. Unlike PP and the abortion industry, Brinker should tell women the whole truth, and then trust them to make their choices.

Choices that are fully informed.

Planned Parenthood doesn’t trust women, or children. That’s why they savaged Brinker for attempting to withdraw the protective cover of Komen’s good name.

1 Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. 3 He wanted to see who Jesus was, but because he was short he could not see over the crowd. 4 So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way.

9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

~Luke 19:1-10

Earlier this week, the pro-life community had high hopes as Planned Parenthood announced that Susan G. Komen for the Cure had withdrawn their funding…

…sort of.

Komen would not give money beyond funds committed for this fiscal year to an organization that was under government investigation and who didn’t do mammograms. Komen would no longer issue “pass-through” grants, which payed PP to be the middle-man. Jubilation erupted amongst pro-lifers and the word went out to start funding Komen.

Then came yesterday’s clarification by Komen. They will not fund organizations under criminal investigation (but exempted “political” investigations). Further, they reaffirmed their commitment to funding the existing grants, and preserved PP’s eligibility to apply for future grants.

That doesn’t mean PP will actually get the grants. Theoretically, any women’s health agency is eligible to apply.

Then the word went out in many pro-life quarters to stop funding Komen until we see how this clarification plays itself out. As institutional and political policy goes, that’s pretty sound advice. There is, however, a very human dimension that such policy overlooks, and we need to examine that dimension in light of the Gospel story shared above.

Jesus didn’t wait for sinners to convert before He called to them, ate and drank with them. That peeved the religious leadership of His day. He didn’t demand conversion as a precondition for His love. Conversion was the consequence of being encountered by the love of Jesus.

Zacchaeus was the Cecile Richards of his day. He defrauded his people as he collected taxes for the Roman occupiers. Like Richards, he was a social leper, a pariah. Brinker’s support of PP and her association with Richards has made her little better in the eyes of pro-lifers, a status not altogether undeserved.

I have written about this unholy alliance, as have many, many others. In December, Komen began to change course. Planned Parenthood has had six weeks to organize and gin up their attack machine, making it appear as though there was a groundswell of support for PP and disgust for Komen. Something is being missed here, regarding Brinker.

She has been in bed with PP for years. We ardently desire to see that relationship end, however it should be noted that Satan doesn’t let go easily when we try to climb out of bed with him. Such was the case this week when Komen was savagely attacked, and for what?

Not funding Planned Parenthood for not doing mammograms.

Facing an existential threat, Komen backpedaled.

The response from the pro-life community ought to be the full embrace of Brinker, to let her know that it will be alright in the end. We should gin up our own attack machine against any corporation that breaks faith with Komen because they dare to fund actual mammograms over PP’s cheap squeeze. We should savage any group that dares to castigate Komen for wanting the best for our women, instead of second-best.

No, Brinker is unlikely to come up to the communion rail and profess Jesus as her personal Lord and Savior.

No, there won’t be a made-for-TV moment of conversion.

If that’s what people were expecting, forget it.

Brinker has a tiger by the tail and got a good lesson in how badly mauled she can get for letting go. Now she’s reeling from the mauling, and this is no time for us to sit on our hands. This is when she needs our support the most. Her conversion will be gradual, and painful. The magnitude of her past sin in bedding down with PP determines the magnitude of the consequences for breaking those ties, and the magnitude of support she will need in going forward.

We need to meet with Brinker, in private and in strictest confidence to ascertain her needs and how we can help Komen be all that it can be ethically and morally in its vital mission in saving women’s lives. We need to offer her more than a kind word for attempting doing the right thing.

We need to offer her our Christian love, a love that calls to her in her own self-imposed social exile as Jesus called to Zacchaeus in his, a love that is unconditional. Then we need to embrace each change, no matter how small.

Nancy Brinker is a woman who has tried to chart a new course and was savaged with a hellish fury this week. The question for us this week is who we wish to emulate:

Jesus, or the crowd who muttered, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”

Until Brinker shoves us away definitively, I’m with Jesus. I’ll gladly dine with Nancy Brinker and support her in any way that I can. She is a woman of great influence for good or ill, and that is why Hell unleashed its minions on her this week.

Pray for her.

For those women who go to Planned Parenthood, this is a sight that you have not seen to date. It’s a mammogram machine. It’s what Planned Parenthood led people to believe they had and used.

They lied.

Foundations don’t like it when they give an organization millions of dollars for services that are not rendered. They’re just funny about stuff like that, and Susan G. Komen is to be applauded for finally putting their foot down and pulling Planned Parenthood’s funding.

SGK Chairwoman Nancy Brinker is Susan Komen’s sister and has been making good on a deathbed promise to Susan to find a cure for this disease. Brinker could simply put all of her eggs in the research basket and go full throttle on research.

She doesn’t. She has taken a humane and balanced approach by also funding breast cancer screenings for middle-aged women, and preventive education for younger women.

The problem is that she gave millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood, who said they performed mammograms, but only performed manual breast exams (feeling for lumps). That’s a problem. In the spectrum of clinical services, a manual exam is orders of magnitude less effective at detection than a mammogram.

The narrative against Komen is that needy women will now suffer because Komen is going to…

…wait for it…

…Fund organizations that will do actual mammograms for needy women.

So vexed is the Planned Parenthood crowd that New York’s Mayor Mike Bloomberg has offered Planned Parenthood a $250,000 matching grant for fundraising. This means that PP will have $500,000 within a week to continue their manual breast exams on women.

Too bad New York’s billionaire mayor didn’t seize on the opportunity to purchase an actual mammogram machine for New York’s hundreds of thousands of low-income women. Instead, he continues to fund the building of PP’s Potemkin villages.

Though it seems longer, it was only last year that Lila Rose released undercover videos of PP nurses advising a “pimp” and his bottom girl to take their teenage prostitutes to the county health department for free services if they lacked health insurance or cash.

Is that not the reason why city, state, federal, and foundation money (such as Komen’s) was given to PP in the first place?

Hear the lie directly from Cecile Richards’ own mouth, and the truth from PP employees regarding the mammograms:

The response of PP is to claim that they provide referrals for mammograms, which is pretty weak, at best. PP may also have reimbursed some centers for mammograms, but why the middle-man?

Not detecting a lump by manual exam does not mean that there are no lumps. If palpation were as good as a mammogram, we wouldn’t perform the mammograms at all. That’s pretty basic stuff. So why does PP need Komen’s money? Because PP needs money. Period.

For the best chance at catching cancer in its earliest stages, women will need a mammogram referral anyway, regardless of lump detection. So why can’t PP just give the referral over the phone when women call, or hand it to them when they walk in off the street?

Because mediocrity never concerns itself with excellence in patient care. Mediocrity is all about the money. Komen has made a wise and ethical business decision by cutting out the middle-man and funding actual mammograms. Mediocrity’s reply?

Women are going to suffer and die because Komen prefers to fund actual mammograms over squeezing breasts.

What PP has not said is that they are so committed to women’s health that their staff are all donating five hours per week to perform their manual breast screenings and give referrals for mammograms.

They haven’t said it because that’s not part of the business model.

This is PP’s most dire hour. If Komen is allowed to pull up stakes without being savaged, plenty of big corporations will pull up stakes as well. Plan to see corporations abandoning Komen, not out of anger at Komen, but for fear of Planned Parenthood. There is a simple strategy to blunt PP’s attack.

Komen, TODAY, needs to announce a new inner-city initiative where they will purchase mammogram machines for the neediest urban centers, where local governments will provide low-cost, and medicaid-subsidized mammograms as the answer to PP’s cheap squeeze. They should then issue a call to all major corporations to join in this effort.

And what better month to do it in than Black History Month where we turn our attention to racism’s residue, which has left us with enduring inequities? Given the frightful incidence of breast cancer in the Black community, it’s an initiative whose time has come.

Komen can seize this opportunity and lead the way with excellence as the antidote to Planned Parenthood’s mediocrity.

Dear Ms. Brinker,

As one who has been at odds with SGK over your organization’s funding of Planned Parenthood, I write today to offer you my heartfelt gratitude and congratulations for the principled and prudential position that you have taken in defunding Planned Parenthood.

Having lost many family members to cancer, and having several close friends experience the ravages of breast cancer, I’ve experienced this issue intimately and laud you for making good on your deathbed promise to your sister, Susan. You have done what so many researchers could only dream of.

You have rallied an entire nation around women and the disease that strikes fear not only into their hearts, but into the hearts of the men who love them passionately. You have raised hundreds of millions of research dollars and in so doing have advanced the understanding of molecular medicine in the field of oncology far beyond where it would be today, but for your foundation’s single-mindedness of purpose.

In all of that focus on research, you have not forgotten the women of today who lack the means for appropriate breast screening utilizing state of the art mammography, and the need for younger women to be educated in prevention. Toward that end, it is my understanding that you and Planned Parenthood saw a shared mission and purpose in the field of women’s health where breast cancer screening and prevention were concerned.

Many of us heard of your largesse in funding breast screenings at Planned Parenthood, screenings which we were told included mammograms. Tragically, we have come to know that Planned Parenthood lied about performing mammograms, and in so doing took money from SGK that might have otherwise benefited women through mammography elsewhere, or through additional research.

Over the past few years, repeated sting operations have time and again caught Planned Parenthood acting with treachery:

Lying about performing mammograms.
Aiding in what they perceived to be the sex trafficking of minors.
Suborning lies from perceived minors to skirt reporting of statutory rape.
Lying about the developmental status of the baby they were about to abort.

And on, and on…

SGK’s February 1, 2012 statement of clarification speaks very clearly as to why the defunding took place:

We are dismayed and extremely disappointed that actions we have taken to strengthen our granting process have been widely mischaracterized. It is necessary to set the record straight.

We regret that these new policies have impacted some longstanding grantees, such as Planned Parenthood, but want to be absolutely clear that our grant-making decisions are not about politics. Throughout our 30 year history, our priority has always been and will continue to be the women we serve. As we move forward, we are working to ensure that there is no interruption or gaps in services for the women who need our support most in the fight against breast cancer.

Indeed your stringent criteria leave little room for organizations that are repeatedly caught in sting operations either lying to, or suborning lies from young people. Such criteria also no doubt would require an organization such as Planned Parenthood to actually perform the mammograms they claim to perform, or at the very least, set the record straight when others make such false claims on their behalf.

So now you are being assailed by Planned Parenthood and their devotees for being…

…what?

Anti-women’s health?

That’s a tough narrative to sell where SGK is concerned.

If the word circulating on the internet is true, Planned Parenthood has raised over $400,000 in response to your withdrawal of funding. This is indeed good news all around. Planned Parenthood has demonstrated repeatedly that when monies are withdrawn they have the capability of stepping up and doing the necessary fundraising to offset and replace the lost income. That is a cardinal sign of a strong and financially healthy organization. It means that SGK can give their support elsewhere, confident in knowing that Planned Parenthood can thrive without your support.

You have acted here with the highest integrity and moral courage. Your manifest integrity should serve as a beacon to corporations that currently fund Planned Parenthood, and who might fear the backlash and vilifying you have been receiving should they similarly redirect their money. I would encourage those corporations to fund real women’s health initiatives by funding Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Such a move would indemnify themselves against Planned Parenthood’s predictable allegation of hating women and not supporting women’s health. It would also increase your efficacy in accelerating the arrival of that day when this terrible scourge becomes a thing of the past. Perhaps corporations switching their support might in conjunction with SGK establish a program of purchasing and donating mammogram machines to areas of need, especially for low-income women.

For now, Ms. Brinker, my heartfelt congratulations and gratitude once again for your principled leadership in upholding your exacting standards with equally rigorous equanimity, regardless of the consequences. Through your principled leadership, many more women’s lives will be saved, and many more women made whole once again.

God Bless You,

Gerard M. Nadal, Ph.D.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS HERE AT THE UNITED NATIONS THIS WEEK PUSHING FOR THE REMOVAL OF PARENTAL CONTROL OVER THEIR CHILDREN’S SEXUAL BEHAVIOR. I’M REPOSTING THIS TO START AN ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC DATA HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THEIR APPROACH.

Remember Joe Camel? Remember the furor over Camel brand cigarettes and their cartoon icon being used to market something dangerous and deadly to children? We were concerned that something children were doing in the present moment might well come back to bite them three or four decades later in the form of cancer, heart disease, and stroke. Rightfully so.

How would the debate have played out if children suffered these diseases within days or weeks of their first cigarette? How might we have responded under those circumstances? More vociferously, for certain. And if these diseases struck our children in their prime, maiming them for life, or even killing them, what sort of legislation would we demand regarding those who sell to minors?

Now let’s consider Planned Parenthood and how they have managed to strong arm our legislatures into doing their bidding, in being able to dispense contraceptives to children twelve and older without parental knowledge or consent, how they have fought against parental notification and consent laws regarding surgical and medical abortions on children, and how they circumvent these laws where they do exist with judicial bypasses.

Let’s consider how Planned Parenthood has their own cartoon character, Superhero for Choice, who kills Christian protesters in a promotional video targeting children. See the sick video here.

Planned Parenthood Superhero for Choice

We need to consider some Centers for Disease Control (CDC) data that shows the plight of our children, the staggering rates of their affliction with STD’s, how CDC says condoms don’t work very well at all in preventing disease transmission, and then we need to discuss the timing for some class action suits.

Consider:

Here are the CDC data that show what a horrifically effective job Planned Parenthood and their fellow travelers have done in destroying the lives of our young people, corrupting them in their innocence and fertility.

The data are from the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Surveillance, 2008. These data are presented as a follow-up to an earlier post on Planned Parenthood In New Initiative Targets 10 Year-Old Children With Condoms That Don’t Work. This is the new initiative by PP to finish off our children, pushing all-out for comprehensive sex education down to age ten.

A glance at the data tells the story. Children 10-14 have the lowest rates of STD’s as well as pregnancies. Recall how former PP center Director Abby Johnson t reported how PP is pushing hard for abortions, as they are the principle source of income.

Now link to the post linked above, and look at the data on STD’s and condom efficacy. Condoms don’t work. Even CDC and Planned Parenthood’s own contraceptive bible state as much.

Now consider how much higher condom failure rates and early teen pregnancies would rise after PP gets done completing the corruption of our youth.

As we say in the lab, the data don’t lie. The age groups are in the center of the graphs with the incidence per 100,000 for men and women going to the left and right respectively. The disease being reported is at the bottom of each graph.

Chlamydia — Age- and sex-specific rates: United States, 2008

Gonorrhea — Age- and sex-specific rates: United States, 2008

Primary and secondary syphilis — Age- and sex-specific rates: United States, 2008

Human papillomavirus (HPV) — Prevalence of high-risk and low-risk types among females 14 to 59 years of age from a national survey, 2003–2004

Genital herpes — Herpes simplex virus, type 2, seroprevalence in non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks by age group from national surveys, 1976–1980, 1988–1994, 1999–2004

Ectopic pregnancy — Hospitalizations of women 15 to 44 years of age: United States, 1997–2006

White Bars=Number of abortions per 1,000 live births.
Blue Bars=Number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years.
Black Bars=percentage of total abortions, by age group of women who obtained an abortion — selected states, United States, 2006§

§Data from 48 reporting areas; excludes California, Florida, Louisiana, and New Hampshire.

The age groups may not be so visible along the bottom of the graph. They are, from left to right:

Under 15
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
Over 40

These numbers fail to describe the numbers of cases of cervical cancer that will result from HPV, the numbers of ectopic pregnancies from PID, the numbers of future miscarriages from damaged cervixes in abortion, the horror of children contracting lifetime herpes infections.

Why do we not demand warning labels on condoms? Why do we not demand more stringent laws to protect our children when it comes to sex, especially when the consequences are so much more dire, so much more immediate, so much more life-altering at such earlier ages, than cigarette smoking?

The time has come for the adults to get serious about the savagery of our children by Planned Parenthood. It’s time to defund and dismantle this criminal enterprise once and for all.

We can do it again.

Speaker Quinn

Yesterday, a Federal Judge in New York issued an injunction against the unjust law that sought to muzzle and destroy New York City’s pregnancy centers with odious mandatory signage and telephone disclaimers. The law was not enjoined in part, but in its entirety. Given the politics in this neck of the woods, that’s as clear a condemnation of New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn as can be imagined. It’s certain that she’ll appeal, but given the judge’s complete disdain for the obvious Constitutional violations, an appeal seems ill-fated.

Quinn and the bill’s sponsor, Councilwoman Jessica Lappin, both get slopped at the same trough by NARAL and Planned Parenthood, so no doubt they will go back to the drawing board and craft a new attack.

There were a great many people who fought this fight in New York, on many different levels. I shudder to name names, as there were simply so many and I couldn’t possibly put together an exhaustive list. However, here is a partial listing of people or organizations in the thick of the fight (Not all in any particular order):

Chris Bell, Good Counsel Homes
Dr. Alveda King and the National Black Pro-Life Coalition
Chris Slattery, EMC Pregnancy Centers
Chaplain Viviana Hernandez
Father Peter Pilsner
Bill Harder, Crossroad Foundation
Greg Pfundstein, Chiaroscuro Foundation
Ed Mechmen, Archdiocese of New York
NYC Councilman Dan Halloran
NYC Councilman Fernando Cabrera
The Alliance Defense Fund
The American Center for Law and Justice
Mrs. Florence Maloney
Reverend Michel Faulkner
Reverend Bill Devlin
Theresa Bonopartis, Lumina
Metro Clergy for Better Choices
New York Life Team
Rev. Donald Saddler
Mayor James Garner, Long Island Republican
Ed Farrell
Bishop Roderick Caesar
Father Benedict Groeschel
Bishop Clark
Father Gill
Father Gerald Murray
Father Peter West
Dr. Elizabeth Rex, Children First Foundation
Dr. Anne Mielnik
Deacon Greg Kandra, Currents (Net TV)
Jill Stanek
Steve Ertelt, LifeNews.com
LifesiteNews.com
EWTN

To these need to be added those I can’t recall at the moment (pre-senescence), the multitude who testified before the New York City Council, who lifted us up in prayer, who called their Councilmen and Councilwomen, and who marched and stood with us at City Hall when the vote was cast.

Most of all, God and the host of Heaven.

This fight is not over yet, not by a mile. However, this ruling represents a serious blow to this movement by NARAL and Planned Parenthood. It also is a major defeat for Christine Quinn, the angry and tyrannical Speaker who would be Mayor. This was, and remains a total team effort, with no superstars. Some have been more visible publicly, but all have poured their hearts and souls into this fight. If folks notice a name glaringly omitted from the list, contact me ASAP.

I don’t think today is a day for taking a victory lap. It is a day for recognizing the thousands and thousands of human hours spent by all who fought this fight in New York, and those who supported them, especially the families.

Most of all, it is a day to give glory, honor, and praise to our God who has been with us throughout this long ordeal in New York, and the much wider nightmare since 1973. It is a day to praise God for the good that He has brought out of this ordeal, the emergence of a pro-life community of Black pastors that is growing as we speak.

Gloria in excelsis Deo!
Et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis!

Planned Parenthood 2008 Figures

The picture tells the story. These are the people who, along with NARAL, are attacking Crisis Pregnancy Centers all over the nation. Saving babies is bad for business.

A ten year-old girl has seen right through these people, as only children can. Click here for the eloquence of a young girl’s purity.
.
.
.
Graphic via Vita Pro Omni.

As I was preparing dinner, my ten year old, Elizabeth Marie, approached and shared with me what she would write if she had a popular blog like mine. So, I sat her down to the blog and told her to write it up, that she would be Coming Home’s first guest blogger. The Spirit is strong with this little one. Here’s Elizabeth in her own words, title and all:

One of the biggest lies Planned Parenthood tells is their name.

Their name says “We plan your parenthood”, but they really destroy it by aborting your baby. I think their name should be “We destroy your parenthood”. Another thing about all Pro-aborts is their name disguise. “abortion” is just some fancy way of saying “murdering babies”. They just changed the name so it didn’t seem like they were murdering. And babies are just smaller, cute people who don’t know too much yet. Abortion doctors should remember they were once babies and they could have been aborted. But no! Their mothers chose for them to live! So let unborn babies live!!

Planned Parenthood Condoms Packaged as Lolipops for Teen Campaign, with Their Teen-Line number Printed on Back

In anticipation of the UN Conference on Children later this month, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) has released a new document, Exclaim!

In this document, Planned Parenthood leads an all-out assault against parental rights over their children by calling for laws to empower children and leave parents out in the cold.

Some key excerpts from the document:

Inalienable: Everyone is entitled to human rights simply for being human. Human rights cannot be taken away or given up from anyone, irrespective of their age, gender, ethnicity, race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, disability, HIV status or health status. reproduction, reproductive health and
parenthood.

This from the people aborting over 330,000 humans per year in the US, including those with disabilities. This from the people doing gender-specific abortions. Do they hear themselves speak?

Another reason why young people’s sexual rights are particularly complex is because of the need to both protect and empower young people. There is a common assumption that young people are incapable of making decisions for themselves, so parents or other adults should have full authority over decisions related to their
sexuality. Resistance to recognize young people’s sexuality and their decision- making abilities makes the realization of young people’s sexual rights all the more challenging.

The concept of the evolving capacity of young people stems from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It draws attention to the rights of children and adolescents, as well as calls on leaders and societies to value young people’s opinions and decisions in light of their evolving capacities.

As a father of three young children, I have not noted in them any evolved capacity for making sound and reliable judgements regarding sex. I’m still trying to get them to make good hygiene a habit. They need strong parental authority to guide them in their development.

All people under 18 years should enjoy the full range of human rights, including sexual rights. The importance and relevance of some rights change as a person transitions from infancy to childhood to adolescence. Therefore, the rights of children and youth must be approached in a progressive and dynamic way.

The rights and protection of young people under the age of 18 differ from those of adults. Particular attention must be given to these differences in relation to sexual rights. The evolving capacity of young people to make decisions about their health and well- being must be recognized, while also ensuring appropriate protection of their best interests.

Were all of that not enough, here’s the killer, one of PP’s stated goals:

REMOVAL OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT OR SPOUSAL CONSENT LAWS THAT PREVENT YOUNG PEOPLE FROM SEEKING SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES.

Lest anyone doubt how young Planned Parenthood’s target audience is, try TEN YEARS OLD!!

From another one of several PP documents aimed at children:

Stand and Deliver: Sex, Health and Young People in the 21st Century (click here to read the document).

Defining Adolescence

As most societies define adolescence and youth in terms of both age and life circumstances, there is no universal agreement on what is a ‘young person’. The national legal age for political participation and the availability of data on different age groups can also determine how societies define youth. The World Health Organization defines young people as those from 10 to 24 years of age, including adolescents (10–19 years) and youth (15–24 years). IPPF (International Planned Parenthood Federation) uses the terms young people, youth and adolescents interchangeably to refer to people who are between 10 and 24 years. Defining all people under 18 years of age as a child is often not useful because it ignores the circumstances of youth who are faced with pressures and responsibilities that are usually reserved for adults. Policies and programmes for young people should focus not so much on age, but on the specific developmental needs and rights of individuals as they transition from childhood to adulthood.

This new document, Exclaim! does not specify a bottom age limit, though Stand and Deliver does. Perhaps Exclaim! is going all the way with no age restrictions at all.

Exclaim! is as diabolical a piece of evil as can be crafted. Planned Parenthood has declared an all-out World War on parental rights. If there were doubts before, there can be no doubt now as to their malevolent intent regarding our children. This is war!

I’ll be writing more about Exclaim! this week. In the interim, here are a few other articles I’ve written that serve as backdrop for what is to come. They contain Centers for Disease Control Data that show the extent of this holocaust on our children.

Planned Parenthood to Girl Scouts: Masturbate, and You Don’t Have to Tell Sex Partners if You Have HIV

Planned Parenthood: The Next Joe Camel

Planned Parenthood and the STD’s of “Waist Up”

H/T Leticia Velasquez

Senator Boxer

It seems that Senator Barbara Boxer is insisting that Planned Parenthood really, REALLY, performs mammograms, despite Live Action’s latest sting. Read about it here.

It’s an odd set of circumstances. On the one hand, we have Abby Johnson, former PP clinic director, who claims that no PP does mammograms. On the same hand we have the same story from PP clinics taped in the latest Live Action sting. All claim PP merely gives referrals for mammograms performed at real health centers.

On the other hand we have Susan G. Komen giving millions of dollars to PP for mammograms they insist PP performs. We also have PP president Cecile Richards and Senator Boxer insisting that PP performs mammograms.

At the least, Richards ought to inform her employees that the mammogram machines exist at Planned Parenthood so they know enough to schedule appointments. While she is at it, perhaps she could get together with Senator Boxer and furnish the American people with a list of PP centers that perform mammograms.

Perhaps Richards and Boxer are correct, and the people who actually staff the centers can’t see the elephant in the exam room. Perhaps Live Action managed to beat all odds and call every PP center without a machine. If so, that’s a statistical feat that will never be duplicated anytime soon.

In their latest sting, Live Action decided to call Planned Parenthood clinics in 27 states to set up appointments for mammograms. Not surprisingly, they admitted to not owning the machines or performing the service. Get the details and listen to the recording Here.

This sting is in response to PP president Cecile Richards’ claim that stripping PP of federal funding would be devastating to women’s health, as PP performs vital mammograms. She’s wrong. PP performs breast exams, not mammograms. PP gives referrals for mammograms. Therefore the only people who will be negatively impacted are adolescent males across America.

It’s every puerile male dream come true to have women pay to have their breasts felt for no useful medical purpose, only to have a referral handed to them for a mammogram. Scanning the breast for lumps not yet detectable is the essence of mammography. Sorry boys, but Live Action ruined the dream.

This also calls to mind Susan G. Komen Foundation’s donations of millions of dollars to PP with the explanation that PP performs mammograms. Komen President Nancy Brinker sat on the board of directors for PP in Texas, and certainly knows better. So there’s even more fraud afoot.

So, Live Action has demonstrated through their stings that PP:

Lies about performing mammograms.

Lies about what abortion is.

Conspires with children to cover the age of the child’s rapist.

Conspires with pimps in child sex-trafficking.

Believes that parents of young children have no right to know of their daughter’s sexual activity.

Has in place programs to bypass mandatory parental notification and consent laws through judicial bypass.

Denies treatment to people lacking insurance or cash.

Sends sex workers and others to donate blood as a means of obtaining free STD testing.

Claims condoms to be safe and effective, when CDC states otherwise.

It’s time to begin the mantra that PP is bad for the public health.