After having listened to all the discussions and arguments back and forth, and I have to say: personally, I think that the arguments the Susan G. Komen Foundation is providing for not funding mammograms at Planned Parenthood are flimsy ones at best. And, they could potentially hurt a lot of women, by preventing the screening of breast cancer at an early stage. At least, theoretically (I don't buy that it will for a second.)
Frankly, if an organization chooses not to fund another organization due to political differences, that's their right, I think. But JUST SAY SO. Don't make up bogus excuses that don't make any sense whatsoever, under examination. If you have retained a failed Republican candidate who ran for office vowing to defund Planned Parenthood and placed her in a senior policy position, just admit it and be honest about things. Don't hide behind a smokescreen.
Having said that, it's also my right as a citizen to decide not to support an organization that I don't feel is using their money wisely, or is using it to make political decisions or bring down a worthy organization I support and think is worthwhile. And also, is causing a lot of women to have to make difficult decisions about which side they're on, because for years, the Komen organization and Planned Parenthood supporters have worked side by side to support a variety of grass roots women's causes. Creating such a rift hurts everyone.
So, don't expect me to be supporting anything to do with the Susan G. Komen Foundation any time soon. That's not boycotting. It's making an informed consumer choice.
Ironically, I think the whole uproar will ultimately hurt the Komen Foundation, and not Planned Parenthood. The Koman support amounts to about $700,000 annually, from what I've read, and already, Mayor Bloomberg has pledged $250,000 to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings. Many other donations are pouring in. When all is said and done, I think Planned Parenthood is the one that stands to gain from all this.