by Stephen Frank
By Joel Brind, Ph.D.
… “Brinton was the chief organizer for the 2003 NCI (U.S. National Cancer Institute) “workshop” on “early reproductive events and breast cancer”, a panel which reported that the lack of an ABC link had been “established”. In other words, since 2003, the NCI has firmly maintained the position that there is no ABC link; that the studies which had reported such a link were deemed unreliable. However, Read more…
The abortion provider uses a vast media and political network to maintain its subsidies from government and private charities.
By ROBERT P. GEORGE AND O. CARTER SNEAD
The Susan G. Komen Foundation, an organization dedicated since 1982 to fighting, and one day curing, breast cancer, decided to extricate itself from the culture wars by discontinuing grants to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest provider of abortions. The grants Komen had been making amounted to $650,000 last year, funding some 19 local Planned Parenthood programs that offered manual breast exams but only referrals for mammograms performed elsewhere. Read more…
It has been deeply revealing and we have learned much.
First of all, that the relationship existed. After all the years of doubt or uncertainty by many contributors to the Pink Ribbon campaign over whether the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure donated some of those funds to Planned Parenthood, it’s all out there now. So there will never be another Pink October or any other fundraising campaign in which ubiquitous pink ribbons and the Komen logo of the breast cancer awareness giant will not be associated with Planned Parenthood, the abortion giant. Read more…
Planned Parenthood’s bitter campaign against Komen–aided by left-liberal activists and media–is analogous to a protection racket: Nice charity you’ve got there. It’d be a shame if anything happened to it. The message to other Planned Parenthood donors is that if they don’t play nice and keep coughing up the cash, they’ll get the Komen treatment. Read more…
My name is Margaret Kelledy. I am a senior at Azusa Pacific University, and the President of our Students for Life chapter. I have been an avid pro-life activist for nearly nine years but I was never able to attend a Walk for Life until this year. As I walked through the streets of San Francisco surrounded by over 40,000 people who were all there with one goal in mind: to put an end to the senseless killing of God’s creations, I could not help but picture all the lives that will never get a chance to live. Read more…
by Charlie Butts
Komen initially decided to stop providing funds to Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion-provider in the country. It had reportedly adopted new criteria excluding the clinic chain from future grants for breast cancer screenings because it was under government investigation at the urging of pro-life groups. Read more…
by Peter Heck
Call it Planned Parenthood’s war on choice. In less time than it takes to scald a child to death with a saline injection into the womb, the rabid pro-abortion lobby descended like vultures down upon the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation. The Komen crime? They dared exercise their right to choose when it came to whom they gave donations and funding.
The relationship between Komen and the abortion mill has always been a baffling one on several levels. Komen was started as an organization that sought to find ways to save the sick and suffering. Planned Parenthood began as an organization based upon the Margaret Sanger lie of eugenics that taught weaker beings should be exterminated. Komen exists upon the fundamental concept that all life is valuable. Planned Parenthood exists upon the fundamental deceit that only “wanted” or “convenient” life is worthy of protection. Komen’s answer to social problems is to strive to find ways to support the living. Planned Parenthood’s answer to social problems is to increase access to killing procedures.
And then there’s the abortion/breast cancer link that leaves a rational mind boggled as to why an abortion provider would ever receive funding from an organization fighting breast cancer. While pro-abortion activists rail that any supposed link between the two is debunked, that just isn’t true.
Planned Parenthood claims that the National Cancer Institute officially denied abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer in their 2003 conference. But what they conveniently omit to mention is that the decision to do so was purely political and was accompanied by many dissenting voices like Joel Brind of Baruch College. Brind, a PhD endocrinologist in New York City, complains that the conference “refused to allow attending scientists to present the opposing position of the scientific research establishing the link, showing that abortion was declassified as a cancer risk for political and not scientific reasons.” They also ignore the inconvenient fact that the NCI’s lead researcher has now completely retreated from her position.
As the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation faces accusations that it split with Planned Parenthood over political pressure, at least a couple pro-life groups are claiming the organization may have acted out of concern over an alleged link between abortion and breast cancer.
The theory that induced abortion increases the risk of breast cancer has been studied for decades and is a controversial one — and one that is contested by major medical organizations. Read more…
“Breast Cancer: Risks and Prevention”, by Angela Lanfranchi, MD, FACS and Joel Brind, PhD:
A few excerpts from the preface of the last 2 editions:
Over the last thirty years, while most major cancers have started to decline, breast cancer incidence in the US has increased by an alarming 40%. Most of this increase has occurred in the authors’ generation, the generation of “Women’s Lib.” Read more…
By Kevin J. Jones
Washington D.C., Jan 25, 2012 / 05:52 pm (CNA).- A Democratic-leaning Catholic group’s favorable reaction to the Obama administration’s new contraception mandate is being criticized for neglecting the threat to religious freedom and wrongly claiming that contraception lowers the abortion rate.
“This is a real attack on the religious freedom of millions of Americans. People who care about the future of our country should not stand idly by,” said Eric Rassbach, national litigation director of the D.C.-based Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Read more…
January 24, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – What’s more newsworthy: that several hundred thousand people converged on Capitol Hill in the midst of a cold rain in the middle of January in order to protest abortion, or that a tiny handful of pro-abortion counter protesters showed up as well? Read more…
Question for the media: Are pro-lifers invisible?
When 300,000 people show up for the March for Life in Washington, D.C., the media mentions next to nothing. When the multitude is especially youthful and upbeat, the liberal media says they’re mostly old and tired.
Watch this live footage and see the truth for yourself:
If you have ever wanted to get a fully professional, reliable angle on abortion research a new initiative by Priscilla Kari Coleman (interviewed by MercatorNetin November) should interest you. Read more…
by Charlie Butts
According to Paul Rondeau, executive director of the American Life League, “This administration treats Catholics as useful idiots” and generally undermines religious freedom. Read more…
Monday, January 23, marks the 39th anniversary of Roe vs Wade. Hundreds of thousands of young people journeyed to our nation’s capital to protest this Supreme Court decision. This is nothing new; the protest and march has been going on for years, and it has been gaining in popularity. In fact it seems to me the entire pro-life movement has grown in recent years, especially among the younger set. Read more…
January 23, 2012 http://www.thepublicdiscourse.
39 years ago, the Supreme Court delivered a radical, legally untenable, immoral decision. It has forfeited its entitlement to have its decisions respected, and followed, by the other branches of government, by the states, and by the people. Read more…
by Charlie Butts
Americans United for Life (AUL) has released its seventh annual “Life List” revealing how states are moving closer to a pro-life America.
Forty-seven states considered more than 460 abortion-related measures and enacted more than 70 of them. At least 86 bills were introduced in 32 states that were based on the pro-life group’s model language. The ranking of all 50 states is based on the way each deals with a comprehensive list of life issues. Among the top states this year are Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Arkansas. Read more…
by Charlie Butts
Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. The Annual March for Life is under way in the nation’s capital with as many as 200,000 pro-lifers braving poor weather conditions in Washington to march to the steps of the Supreme Court, where abortion was legalized on January 22, 1973. Read more…
by Rob Schwarzwalder
A judge’s decision to order the abortion of “a mentally ill woman’s unborn baby and sterilize her — if it meant she had to be ‘coaxed, bribed, or even enticed … by ruse’ into the procedure” has drawn appropriate fire from officials in the Bay State. Read more…
Loading ...
