Planned Parenthood spends $1.4 Million in Anti-Romney ads

[Ben Kenobi]

so it is pretty silly to assume the whole organization is a front to get people to pay for abortions who don't want to pay for them.

Then why did Komen reverse their position? If you really are devoted to breast cancer services, then what they should have said is "tough noogies." You don't like how we do things - donate to PP directly. What was happening is the folks who work with PP were getting them to shut down the institutional support for Komen. All of the campaigns (businesses, etc), that were set up to go to Komen were getting shut down by the PP supporters who set them up in the first place. So, not only did Komen lose the money from the pro-aborts, they lost their biggest overall donors, people who individually would have wanted to see them keep going - but weren't donating as individuals, but rather as an organization.

That's how it all works. The PP folks sold the organizations on being part of the pink ribbon campaign to help fight breast cancer. Organization says ok. Organization runs a meeting encouraging people to give to the Pink Ribbon campaign to help fund Komen. Employee believes he's doing a good thing by donating. PP folk collects the cash for Komen - gives it to Komen. PP folks on the Komen board allocate a portion of Komen's funds to PP. They never disclose this fact to the donors, and they try to keep a layer between themselves and the donors in the first place. The important people at each step of the way are all PP members.

[giblets]

I think they do sometimes provide financial assistance to the really cash-strapped abortion-seekers. At least, I recall reading that recently from someone claiming to be a PP employee trying to rebut the "PP is in it to make money off abortions" claim. Don't remember where though. I don't know how much an abortion costs them; IIRC they charge something like four or five hundred, which makes abortion their single largest source of revenue. But it may be substantially subsidized even at that rate, for all I know.

As to being primarily an abortion provider, about one out of ten women (a little more than 300K out of 3 million) who goes to PP is there to get an abortion. Without actually siccing an accountant on their books, I can't say how all the money balances out, but I don't want to pay them a bloody cent regardless. Not that I think they're all acting in bad faith, cackling like Snidely Whiplash or whatever BK pictures them doing. It's just that any money they get is going to support their whole business, both the 90% I find admirable and the 10% that's unspeakably loathsome.

I find it doubtful that abortions at a $400-500 rate are being subsidized at all. I guess we could look for data on what abortions from for-profit providers cost. The "money is fungible" argument doesn't carry much weight if they aren't losing any money on the abortions they do provide. In fact since that's the one service that they might actually be able to make money from, cutting their funding for contraception and cancer screenings could possibly force them to rely more on providing abortions.

[regexcellent]

Typical bull**** short sighted crap from someones whos never had a loved one go through that kind of heartwrenching decision. STFU until you have to deal with that situation.

Oh, the decision of whether or not to kill your wife? You're right; I've never been married. But I'm sure it's horribly gut-wrenching, as you put it. Yet the correct decision is also obvious. Hint: the correct answer doesn't rhyme with "girder."

Or did you mean the decision to get an abortion? Also gut-wrenching, also obvious, doesn't rhyme with "girder," or "proportion" for that matter.

[Kuciwalker]

you're begging the question, re.

[DinoDoc]

They pay Planned Parenthood to perform a service- breast exams.

They pay them to provide mammograms. They don't do those. The fund decided to fund those directly rather than pay people to refer patients to other people before being brow beaten by the media.