The Virginian-Pilot
©
It's been a roller-coaster week at the local affiliates of both Planned Parenthood and the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation.
First, the announcement Tuesday that national Komen officials were withdrawing most of their funding from Planned Parenthood affiliates across the country for breast-cancer prevention efforts.
Then three days of controversy as people accused the Komen foundation of playing politics with funding and giving in to social conservatives. Opponents of Planned Parenthood, meanwhile, applauded the move.
And finally, on Friday, the decision by the foundation to reinstate the funding.
"We were all screaming and crying," said Erin Zabel, director of marketing and public relations at Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Virginia, which has offices in Virginia Beach and Hampton.
Meanwhile, the Tidewater affiliate of the Komen Foundation has been fielding angry calls and emails all week.
"We're happy it's been restored," said Maria Williamson, board president of the Tidewater affiliate of the Komen foundation. "It's been a tough week."
Williamson said many people in the community wrongly assumed that local women were going to lose breast-cancer screening, but all of the Komen affiliate's 1,800 to 2,000 screenings a year are done by other health agencies, such as Eastern Virginia Medical School, Riverside Health System, free clinics and health departments.
The only funding that the Tidewater affiliate had given to Planned Parenthood was an $18,000 grant for breast-cancer education in 2010.
Still, supporters sent angry emails and threatened to withdraw support from the local chapter because of what was going on at the national level. Some Planned Parenthoods in other parts of the country do breast-cancer screenings using Komen funds, but not in Hampton Roads.
The local Planned Parenthood used the $18,000 grant to educate 200 young women about breast- cancer signs and self-exams. The grant also funded a public awareness campaign on breast health through radio spots, online resources and presentations at local colleges. The campaign targeted Latino and black women, who have higher rates of breast cancer.
Zabel said the affiliate has applied for a $36,000 grant from Komen this year to expand the initiative. A decision on that grant is expected in March. Meanwhile, this week's controversy spurred donations of $3,500 from more than 30 donors to the local Planned Parenthood during the past two days, along with a $35,000 pledge.
Elizabeth Simpson, 757-446-2635,elizabeth.simpson@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Interesting posts, many full
Interesting posts, many full of hate on BOTH sides.
Settle down. Now the people who claim to support Planned Parenthood are actually putting their money where their mouths are and the people who do not believe in all that Planned Parenthood supports are no longer footing the bill.
The fight against or for abortion will continue.
Pilot Staff –
There are but a few hot button topics these days. Gay rights, guns, abortion...
Not too long ago, this paper reserved the right to require complete names to respond to the two young ladies at Little Creek Amphib Base with their first kiss…
…we thought anonymous comments were likely to spark a flame war that would discourage many others from joining the debate. Would love to hear others' thoughts.
http://hamptonroads.com/2011/12/two-womens-first-kiss-homecoming-first-navy-too#comment-1249891
So. Why hasn’t the same logic been applied to this topic?
Does this same concept apply across the board or is it limited to whatever ya’ll wanna restrict it to?
Time to pony up and tell it like it is.
This is interesting
Hey Craig-This is interesting. I was going to log in to my verified account to reply to this thread, however i couldn't figure out how to do it. It would appear I can only post a "verified" comment when the Pilot decides I can (lol).
this is interesting...
Sometimes, in order to be verified, you have to go thru the whole spiel again. Considering the hundreds of anonymous/alias responses the Pilot gets when the subject is racism, abortion, our President Obama, capitalism vs social democracy, you name it, it is high time the Pilot requires ALL bloggers to be verified. As the Pilot stated just recently, only COWARDS hide afraid of someone recognizing for who they really are.
Please try again.
Craig why do you care?
The GOPT majority has made it quite clear that their legislative priority is nothing but social hit button issues. Are you embarrassed by their agenda and wish to clamp down on comments? Your post is very disingenuous. Sounds like u want to quiet the threads due to the GOPTs off-the-rails agenda that's on display day after day after day.
Well, TR
I'm still a middle of the road kind of guy.
I voted for Glenn Nye last year...not Scott Rigell.
In some aspects/conventions I lean left. In others, I lean right.
What I find curious/questionable is that link I posted...which as far I can determine was a 'first ever'...just take it at face value.
I am familiar with your posts
There is no reason to close the threads. With the deluge of social issue legislative efforts from the GOP since literally day one of the session -- which the paper is simply reporting on -- closing the threads would deny site visitors from commenting on 95% of the days news. You sound anxious to make that happen. The Pilot already does a good job of policing the forums. No need for draconian action. The GOPT has made their bed. They & their backers need to be big boys about it and not call for the stifling of feedback. Plus, the only posters who misbehave that I can see are those shouting 'baby killer'.
I understand your views also.
We can agree to disagree. In some aspects, we're eye to eye.
As far as abortion is concerned - we're about 135 to 180 degrees out of phase.
The point I made was on one 'hot button' issue/topic and questioned the reasoning of the staff. Review my comments on that-you'll see that I differ from the right.
Anxious about closing threads? Nope. Replies should be restricted & we'll all reasoned responses and less invective.
In my mind, if you have something to say-be an adult, stand up, and say it! Don't hide! Are we wearing pants made out of sugar?
In closing, you might wanna check the replies that disparage the pro-lifers. It goes both ways which supports the previous SECDEF's stance.
"we're about 135 to 180 degrees out of phase"
You reinforce my point. The all-abortion / all-the-time legislative agenda of the GOPT is resulting in some discontent from the unwashed poster masses & you want to stifle it. Time to put on some big boy pants. People can & are posting well-reasoned responses minus the invective. I have read all the posts & again, the most invective posts are owned by the GOPTers.
Whats ironic about the "lamestream meedeeuh" Pilot's tepid reporting on this subject is that we do NOT learn from the Pilot that the cancer-fighting Komen group is staffed by very well paid anti-abortion zealots. And that their received donation$ to actual spending ration does not look flattering. I suspect that its that type of information that you protest.
Opinions and real names
I really thought about becoming verified when the practice was first brought up. I even went so far as to begin the process however when becoming verified required a credit card I decided that I wouldn't do it. First and foremost my concern was with security. The assurance the number was not kept in a file is an unacceptable risk given the level of hacker skills today. But of more concern to me was the criteria being used to glean posters. A credit card is not a credential that ensures intelligence or ethics. Is someone that chooses to use cash, or doesn't qualify for a credit card not worthy to comment on a topic? Sometimes verification just allows people to see their names in print.