Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Planned Parenthood's Bait and Switch Deception

Commentary by Rev. Austin Miles
The Susan G. Komen organization that was formed to battle breast cancer gave Planned Parenthood grants of almost $700,000 last year to provide poor women with breast cancer screenings..so Planned Parenthood said.  As more and more information came out about the biggest abortion provider in America, Komen had second thoughts and withdrew any further grants which, by the way, a citizen has the full right to do, or rather what a citizen HAD the right to do.
Planned Parenthood exercised the most blatant 'Bait and Switch' deception to be devised, having their press reps herald THE service they provide, and that is, according to their hacks, to protect poor women who might not be able to recieve mammograms while trying to minimize or even hide their true agenda,which is to kill all inconvenient babies so their mother's personal lives will not be hindered.
It is to be noted that there is no breast cancer screening done at or by Planned Parenthood. They do REFERRELS to medical facilities to do that screening. And while it is falsely claimed that the grants given to them is to screen women, they make a profit by REFERRING women to those facilities which helps finance the promotion and carrying out abortions.
And the murder of these unwanted babies is brutal as they are torn apart with not even anesthetic admistered to the unborn baby that feels everything being done to them. Planned Parenthood takes in millions of dollars to do this horrifically painful dissecting procedure on little live babies.
Not only was Komen deceived as to the purpose of the grants. which was not in the interest of women's health issues or to 'save lives.' but to destroy lives of babies and eventually the lives of many of the mothers who suffer psychological problems as a result and according to medical science, have a higher rate of breast cancer. How ironic as this all comes together.
And the biggest misuse of all, is in conning a respected organization like Komen to publicly support them which gave Planned Parenthood credibility.
When they rightfully pulled their support of Planned Parenthood, liberal democrats orchestrated howls of outrage in the news media and social media to, yell and scream at Komen with an avalanche of hatred directed towards them.
An editorial in the The Contra Costa Times was headlined: Komen Puts Politics Before Women's Health (2/3/12 pg.A11)
Since when is protecting the life of innocent babies a political issue?  It is a humane and moral issue.
The editorial continued: "Komen put red-state, right-wing politics above low-income women's health, pure and simple, with its decision to stop giving money to Planned Parenthood to pay for breast cancer screenings."
Planned Parenthood does NOT do breast cancer screenings. They REFER the client to a medical facility that DOES the screening, for which they possibly receive a kickback for the referrel. So the grant money simply goes into the daily working of the abortion mill...350,000 abortions each year to be exact for which they earn millions.
Then the next paragraph of the editorial reads: "It could be the most cowardly act by a health foundation in U.S. History." How's that again?
Incredibly, the orchestrated public outcry against Komen withdrawing their support was so severe that Komen APOLOGIZED to America and restored the grant.  What?
It did them no good to apologize. As one woman said to the newspaper; "It is not easy 'to forgive and forget." So Komen should be punished forever for even THINKING of not funding Planned Parenthood.
However, a majority of Americans rejoiced that Komen pulled their support.even though temporarily, as they caved in under the pressure.
So does this mean that Americans MUST support things they disagree with? It would seem so. Loews discontinued sponsorship of the TV show, The Muslim Next Door, because they felt that the portrayal of Muslims in generat was inaccurate.
More howls of outrage and threats of boycots ensued. So now the government is telling us that we are obligated to financially sponsor anything the government says is good even though we might disagree with the content?  According to the liberal media and some politicians, this failure to support is unconstitutional. (?)
Maybe this is one way that Obama will force America to 'redistribute the wealth,' which he promised at the beginning of his campaign for President. Was anybody listening?
Your papers...please..