Far-right GOP extremist resigns at Komen

AP via Globe:

A high-ranking official resigned Tuesday from the Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast-cancer charity after a dispute over whether the group should give funding to Planned Parenthood, according to a letter obtained by The Associated Press. Karen Handel, the charity’s vice president for public policy, told Komen officials she supported the move to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood …

Alert BMGers will recall that Handel’s role at Koman was highlighted here last week in a snip from The Nation:

Handel is not your typical philanthropy administrator. She is a Republican pol, a former Georgia secretary of state, who ran in the 2010 gubernatorial primary, with endorsements from Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and anti-immigrant finger-pointing Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. At that time she described herself as “staunchly and unequivocally pro-life,” opposed to stem cell research and a fan of crisis pregnancy centers—places that have repeatedly been shown to use scare tactics and misinformation to dissuade women from seeking abortions.

So far, so good: Komen has stepped back from its efforts to refashion itself from a breast cancer charity into an anti-abortion campaigner. However, the AP continues:

Handel said in the letter the now-abandoned policy was fully vetted by the Komen organization. Its board did not raise any objections when it was presented with the proposed policy in November, Handel said.

Taking her at her word, the organization may simply be scapegoating Handel rather than endorsing any fundamental change in policy. In other words, they may try their hand at politics again after the current storm blows over. Their actions in coming months and years will be the best evidence.


Discuss

10 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. Left definitely winning the culture war today.

    A panel of the 9th Circuit has ruled that California’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

    • Wrong way to put it friend

      America, not the left, wins with that ruling. Churches are still free to marry whom they please but the state must take all comers, that’s not siding with the cultural left that is affirming the right of every American to marry whom they please, its not a cultural issue or a social issue but a constitutional one, and luckily freedom won.

      • I pleasantly disagree

        If half the country sees it as a cultural issue, it’s a cultural issue. Sadly.

        • Fair point

          But I think rather than argue that ‘our side’ won, its better to frame it less of a cultural issue and more of a civil and property rights issue, and places where the campaign has won over voters and more conservative politicians are in places like that. A supermajority of Americans are completely comfortable with the idea of gays serving in the military according to most polls,but only a small plurality support gay marriage. To tick those numbers upward its best to focus on the personal stories. The key to overturning DOMA was getting soldiers, arguably the most respect subgroup in the country to come forward and say they knew their gay brothers and sisters had their backs and were just as competent as them. Similarly getting straight allys in states like ours to come forward and the ah ha moment that before equality they couldnt declare bankruptcy together, visit each other in the hospital, adopt together, etc. puts a human face on it and leads to someone at least saying ‘you know what i still dont like it, but who am I to decide whats right for them?’ thats where we need to go. The day where everyone is comfortable at a pride parade might never come, the day where straight conservatives can at least keep their bigotry with their churches and recognize gay marriage is a way for the government to leave gays alone is a great victory. Clint Eastwood put it best in an interview when he said “why should I give a f–k if gays marry one another?” and thats the goal.

  2. Good start ...

    but if there is any truth to Handel’s statement then Komen has a lot of work to do if they want to regain the trust of those who’s core mission is fighting cancer.

  3. We should keep in mind that Planned Parenthood, with its counseling and supplying contraception, prevents far more abortions than it performs. Anyone who seriously wants to reduce the number of abortions will support Planned Parenthood. They will also support Obama’s health care reform (women with access to health care are less likely to have an abortion).

    But the right wing so-called “right to life” people really don’t care about reducing abortions. They want to keep fulminating about fetuses to distract the gullible from their real mission: to further enrich the wealthiest 1%. I am reminded of Barney Frank’s quip that Republican concern for life begins with conception and ends with birth.

    • Agree Michael Bate

      And that is the main reason why this personally anti-abortion Catholic will remain pro-choice. A robust, compassionate, activist government can do a whole lot more good for women considering terminating their pregnancy if all of this is out in the open. We can truly ensure that the procedure itself remains safe and legal, and I really do not think those that are truly pro-life and in general pro-social justice and compassion for their fellow human beings want to go back to the days of the coat hanger and stair fall, nor must we be hands off, but rather we must do all in our power to make sure its safe, legal, and rare. Progressives are too libertarian when it comes to abortion when they should be focusing just as much on making it rare and ensuring that every expected mother in America can have and raise that child regardless of means if she so chooses. Eliminating economic inequality and crafting a real pro-family economy that puts fathers and mothers to work, creates great schools to educate their kids, and has lasting health care for the entire family will go a long way towards reducing the vast majority of abortions.

      Also its high time progressives asks pro-life conservatives how much bigger government has to get to enforce all the fines, regulations, and criminal offenses they want to impose upon abortion providers. How much bigger it must get to feed, clothe, educate, and house all those new families? Should there be new enforcement agencies, or should the FBI or Homeland Security go after clinics Eliot Ness style? I have never been convinced conservatives have really figured out how to pay for or enforce a return to the pre-Roe world and progressives never bother to ask, but it would be about as effective as prohibition or the war on drugs at truly

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Sat 19 Apr 8:43 PM