SEE ALSO:  Is Red Bull A Drug?

Komen, meanwhile, incurred heated criticism from some members of Congress, numerous liberal advocacy groups and some newspaper editorial writers. But it was applauded by many conservative religious and anti-abortion groups that abhor Planned Parenthood for its role as the leading U.S. abortion provider.

Planned Parenthood says the funding cutoff was a result of Komen succumbing to pressure from anti-abortion activists. Komen, in a statement issued Wednesday evening, denied that politics played a role and reiterated that its decision was based on newly adopted criteria for issuing grants.

The criteria bar grants to any organization that’s under local, state or federal investigation. Planned Parenthood is being investigated for alleged financial improprieties by a Republican congressman acting with the encouragement of anti-abortion groups.

“We regret that these new policies have impacted some long-standing grantees, such as Planned Parenthood, but want to be absolutely clear that our grant-making decisions are not about politics,” the Komen statement said.

It pledged to ensure that women who need breast-health services can still have access to them.

Dr. Eric Winer, a breast cancer specialist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston who is chairman of Komen’s scientific advisory council, said he was confident that breast-screening availability would not be jeopardized.

“The last thing in the world that anyone at Komen wants to do … is to decrease the resources that are available to those women,” he said.

Nonetheless, some members of Komen’s nationwide network were unsettled.

The Komen affiliate in Connecticut posted a notice on its website saying it has enjoyed a “great partnership” with Planned Parenthood of Southern New England and noting that the funding decision was made at Komen’s national headquarters.

“We understand, and share, in the frustration around this situation,” the notice said. “We hope that any investigation prohibiting Planned Parenthood from receiving Komen grants is promptly resolved.”

Planned Parenthood said the Komen grants totaled roughly $680,000 last year and $580,000 the year before, going to 19 of its affiliates for breast-cancer screening and other breast-health services. According to Planned Parenthood, its health centers performed more than 4 million breast exams over the past five years, including nearly 170,000 as a result of Komen grants.

Andrea Hagelgans, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, said the organization was grateful for the outpouring of support since Tuesday evening, when The Associated Press first reported Komen’s decision.

“People respond powerfully when they see politics interfering with women’s health,” she said. “These donations will continue to help expand Planned Parenthood’s critical health care services nationwide, especially those affiliates impacted by the Komen cuts.”

Several members of Congress who support abortion rights voiced dismay at the grant cutoff.

“I was perplexed and troubled to see the decision by Susan G. Komen for the Cure to cut off funding for lifesaving breast cancer screenings through Planned Parenthood because of a political witch hunt by House Republicans,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. “I truly hope that they will reconsider this decision and put the needs of women first.”

The progressive group MoveOn.org launched an online petition calling on Komen to maintain its grants to Planned Parenthood. It said 60,000 people had signed in a matter of hours.

Komen won praise from anti-abortion activists such as Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life.

“The work of the Komen Foundation has lifesaving potential and should not be intertwined with an industry dealing in death,” said Yoest, a breast-cancer survivor.

Komen, based in Dallas and founded in 1982, has invested more than $1.9 billion since then in research, health services and advocacy while becoming the largest breast-cancer charity in the nation. Its Race for the Cure fundraising events have become a global phenomenon.

Editorials about Komen’s decision were published by several newspapers.

“Komen caved to political pressure,” wrote editorial writer Tod Robberson in the Dallas Morning News. “The next time Komen for the Cure comes asking us for an editorial supporting one of their local events, I’m going the think twice.”

The Star-Ledger in New Jersey took a more nuanced view.

“It’s hard to see who the winners are in this mess,” it wrote. “As so often happens when their bodies become a political battleground, women ultimately lose.”

SEE ALSO:

Pfizer Recalls Birth Control Pills

Madonna Super Bowl Halftime Show: ‘No Nipples’ But Definitely In ‘Vogue’

SEE ALSO: Why Ron Paul Got A Free Pass

Dr. Steven Brigham, of Voorhees, N.J., was taken into custody Wednesday night and is being held in the Camden County jail, according to police in Elkton, Md. Authorities also arrested Dr. Nicola Riley in Salt Lake City and she is in jail in Utah. Each is awaiting an extradition hearing.

A grand jury indicted the two doctors after a 16-month investigation, police said.

The investigation began in August 2010 after what authorities say was a botched procedure at Brigham’s clinic in Elkton, located near the border of Maryland and Delaware.

An 18-year-old woman who was 21 weeks pregnant suffered a ruptured uterus and an injured bowel, according to documents filed in a previous investigation by medical regulators. Rather than call 911, Riley drove her to a nearby hospital, where both she and Brigham were uncooperative and Brigham refused to give his name, documents show.

A search of the clinic after the botched abortion revealed a freezer containing 35 late-term fetuses, including one believed to have been aborted at 36 weeks, the documents show.

Brigham, 55, is charged with five counts of first-degree murder, five counts of second-degree murder and one count of conspiracy. Riley, 46, faces one count each of first- and second-degree murder and one conspiracy count.

The charges relate to the botched procedure as well as other abortions performed at the Elkton clinic or fetuses found there, authorities said.

Cecil County State’s Attorney Ellis Roberts declined to elaborate on the charges or the circumstances that led to them, saying it would be inappropriate to comment before Brigham and Riley, who were taken into custody on fugitive warrants, had seen the indictments.

Maryland is one of 38 states that allows murder charges to be brought against someone accused of killing a viable fetus. The 2005 state law has so far only been used for cases in which defendants were accused of assaulting or killing pregnant women.

“We are in uncharted territory,” Roberts said. “At some point in time,” he added, “you will hear our explanation” of the charges.

The state law allows for murder or manslaughter charges to be brought against a person who intends to kill or seriously injure a fetus or who wantonly disregards the safety of a fetus. It does not apply to doctors administering lawful medical care and does not impinge on a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.

Brigham’s attorney, C. Thomas Brown, said in an emailed statement that he does not believe his client has violated any Maryland laws. He said he has not seen any charging documents or spoken with Brigham since the arrest.

“Dr. Brigham has fully cooperated with this investigation,” Brown said. “I had an agreement with the state’s attorney’s office that if Dr. Brigham was charged, he would voluntarily come to Maryland to surrender. For reasons unknown to me, the state did not honor that agreement. … It is my opinion that Dr. Brigham’s arrest in New Jersey was orchestrated to ensure that he remained in custody over this holiday weekend.”

An attorney for Riley also took issue with her client being behind bars.

“We believe the charges are without legal merit,” said attorney Sharon Krevor-Weisbaum. “We believe it’s inappropriate for her to be held without bond. She is not a flight risk and she should be released on her own recognizance.”

Krevor-Weisbaum said Riley’s legal team would comment further after they had seen the indictment.

A spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Rights, a legal advocacy group, said she was not aware of any cases in the United States in which an abortion provider had been charged with murder in the death of a fetus. A Philadelphia doctor, Kermit Gosnell, faces murder charges in the deaths of seven newborn babies but has not been charged with killing fetuses.

The botched 2010 abortion led regulators to order Brigham to stop practicing medicine in Maryland without a license, and Riley’s Maryland license was suspended. Brigham’s New Jersey license was also suspended, leaving him without a valid license in any state, and New Jersey authorities are pursuing revocation of his license there. New Jersey authorities have cooperated with the Maryland criminal probe, said Thomas R. Calcagni, director of the State Division of Consumer Affairs.

According to regulators, Brigham would begin abortions in New Jersey and have his patients drive themselves to Maryland to complete the procedures, taking advantage of Maryland’s more permissive laws. Brigham was not authorized to perform abortions in New Jersey after the first trimester, and regulators called his actions manipulative and deceptive.

In Maryland, licensed physicians can perform abortions before the fetus is deemed capable of surviving outside the womb, and abortions of viable fetuses are permitted to protect the life or health of the mother or if the fetus has serious genetic abnormalities. Doctors generally consider fetuses to be viable starting around 23 weeks.

Anti-abortion activists hailed the arrests of Brigham and Riley.

“These two individuals are now where they belong and should be in jail for the rest of their lives,” the Rev. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life, said in a statement. “Even those who believe abortion should be legal can join with us to stop the out-of-control practices of people like Brigham and Riley.”

SEE ALSO: Best Kisses Of 2011

Dr. Steven Brigham, of Voorhees, N.J., was taken into custody Wednesday night and is being held in the Camden County jail, according to police in Elkton, Md. Authorities also arrested Dr. Nicola Riley in Salt Lake City and she is in jail in Utah. Each is awaiting an extradition hearing.

A grand jury indicted the two doctors after a 16-month investigation, police said.

The investigation began in August 2010 after what authorities say was a botched procedure at Brigham’s clinic in Elkton, located near the border of Maryland and Delaware.

An 18-year-old woman who was 21 weeks pregnant suffered a ruptured uterus and an injured bowel, according to documents filed in a previous investigation by medical regulators. Rather than call 911, Riley drove her to a nearby hospital, where both she and Brigham were uncooperative and Brigham refused to give his name, documents show.

A search of the clinic after the botched abortion revealed a freezer containing 35 late-term fetuses, including one believed to have been aborted at 36 weeks, the documents show.

Brigham, 55, is charged with five counts of first-degree murder, five counts of second-degree murder and one count of conspiracy. Riley, 46, faces one count each of first- and second-degree murder and one conspiracy count.

The charges relate to the botched procedure as well as other abortions performed at the Elkton clinic or fetuses found there, authorities said.

Cecil County State’s Attorney Ellis Roberts declined to elaborate on the charges or the circumstances that led to them, saying it would be inappropriate to comment before Brigham and Riley, who were taken into custody on fugitive warrants, had seen the indictments.

Maryland is one of 38 states that allows murder charges to be brought against someone accused of killing a viable fetus. The 2005 state law has so far only been used for cases in which defendants were accused of assaulting or killing pregnant women.

“We are in uncharted territory,” Roberts said. “At some point in time,” he added, “you will hear our explanation” of the charges.

The state law allows for murder or manslaughter charges to be brought against a person who intends to kill or seriously injure a fetus or who wantonly disregards the safety of a fetus. It does not apply to doctors administering lawful medical care and does not impinge on a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.

Brigham’s attorney, C. Thomas Brown, said in an emailed statement that he does not believe his client has violated any Maryland laws. He said he has not seen any charging documents or spoken with Brigham since the arrest.

“Dr. Brigham has fully cooperated with this investigation,” Brown said. “I had an agreement with the state’s attorney’s office that if Dr. Brigham was charged, he would voluntarily come to Maryland to surrender. For reasons unknown to me, the state did not honor that agreement. … It is my opinion that Dr. Brigham’s arrest in New Jersey was orchestrated to ensure that he remained in custody over this holiday weekend.”

An attorney for Riley also took issue with her client being behind bars.

“We believe the charges are without legal merit,” said attorney Sharon Krevor-Weisbaum. “We believe it’s inappropriate for her to be held without bond. She is not a flight risk and she should be released on her own recognizance.”

Krevor-Weisbaum said Riley’s legal team would comment further after they had seen the indictment.

A spokeswoman for the Center for Reproductive Rights, a legal advocacy group, said she was not aware of any cases in the United States in which an abortion provider had been charged with murder in the death of a fetus. A Philadelphia doctor, Kermit Gosnell, faces murder charges in the deaths of seven newborn babies but has not been charged with killing fetuses.

The botched 2010 abortion led regulators to order Brigham to stop practicing medicine in Maryland without a license, and Riley’s Maryland license was suspended. Brigham’s New Jersey license was also suspended, leaving him without a valid license in any state, and New Jersey authorities are pursuing revocation of his license there. New Jersey authorities have cooperated with the Maryland criminal probe, said Thomas R. Calcagni, director of the State Division of Consumer Affairs.

According to regulators, Brigham would begin abortions in New Jersey and have his patients drive themselves to Maryland to complete the procedures, taking advantage of Maryland’s more permissive laws. Brigham was not authorized to perform abortions in New Jersey after the first trimester, and regulators called his actions manipulative and deceptive.

In Maryland, licensed physicians can perform abortions before the fetus is deemed capable of surviving outside the womb, and abortions of viable fetuses are permitted to protect the life or health of the mother or if the fetus has serious genetic abnormalities. Doctors generally consider fetuses to be viable starting around 23 weeks.

Anti-abortion activists hailed the arrests of Brigham and Riley.

“These two individuals are now where they belong and should be in jail for the rest of their lives,” the Rev. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life, said in a statement. “Even those who believe abortion should be legal can join with us to stop the out-of-control practices of people like Brigham and Riley.”

SEE ALSO:

How Bachmann’s Campaign Fell Apart

Noose Discovered At World Trade Center

Providers that offer abortion coverage would have to set up identical plans without abortion coverage to participate in the health insurance exchanges to be set up under the new law.

The legislation, which passed 251-172, is unlikely to be considered by the Democratic-led Senate and faces a veto threat from Obama. But it gives House Republicans, focused this year on cutting spending and reducing the size of the federal government, a chance to reaffirm their credentials on social conservative issues. Democrats chided Republicans for wasting time better spent on promoting job growth.

Supporters of the bill, including author Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., say they are trying to close loopholes in the health care act that could lead to violations of the long-standing prohibition of the federal funding of abortion.

Opponents warn that millions of middle- and low-income women who receive partial subsidies to buy insurance would be denied abortion coverage. They said most providers are unlikely to set up two separate plans, one with abortion coverage.

The legislation also strengthens conscience protections for antiabortion health care providers. Again there is divergence between bill supporters saying they are merely clarifying existing law and opponents saying it will lead to hospitals denying emergency care to pregnant women.

Democratic opponents said the conscience clause would lead to pregnant women being denied emergency treatment.

“When the Republicans vote for this bill today they will be voting to say women can die on the floor and health care providers don’t have to intervene,” said Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco.

The legislation revives the debate that almost scuttled the health care act. Former Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., leading a rebellion of antiabortion Democrats, joined Pitts in pushing through an amendment that imposed tight restrictions on abortions in the proposed government-run insurance plan.

When the Senate wouldn’t go along, Stupak got Obama to sign an executive order reaffirming the Hyde Amendment, a 1976 provision named after the late Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., that bans all federal funds for abortion except in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at risk.

Pitts argued that the executive order can be rescinded at any time and the new health care act is not bound to follow the Hyde Amendment. As a result, said Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., the law, “when phased in fully in 2014 will open up the floodgates of public funding for abortion in a myriad of programs.”

But the White House, in issuing its veto threat, said the health care law preserves the ban on federal funding and the legislation “intrudes on women’s reproductive freedom and access to health care and unnecessarily restricts the private insurance choices that women and their families have today.”

Under the law, federally subsidized health care plans can offer abortion coverage but they have to set up separate accounts to segregate federal funds from funds that can be used for abortion coverage.

The website and campaign, funded by the Restoration Project criticize Jackson for changing his position on abortion after being against it in the 1970s.

BET.com reports:

According to the Restoration Project, the organization behind the campaign and the billboard, African-American leaders have duped Blacks by their failure to take a stand against abortion in the African-American community.

“Something is wrong when those elected to protect the interests of their constituents turn a blind eye to the horrific impact that abortion is wreaking on the Black community,” said Catherine Davis of the Restoration Project. “In New York City, for every 1,000 Black babies born alive, 1,489 are aborted. In Washington, D.C., for every 100 Black babies born alive, 165 are aborted! Something is wrong!”

Read More At BET.com

RELATED STORIES

Abortion-Aided Genocide Claims Fuel Controversial Ad Campaign

Controversial Anti-Abortion Billboards Staying Up In Oakland

Anti-abortion organization, Issues4Life, created the campaign to bring awareness to what they describe as an abortion aided genocide of Black children. Abortion rights groups say the ads are simplifying a complex issue and dividing people.

“It is reprehensible, and disrespectful to the African-American community,” said Lupe Rodriguez, spokeswoman for the Alameda County branch of Planned Parenthood. “They’re trying to single out one part of the overall health care of that community, and using a wedge issue to divide people.”

Read more at BostonHerald.com

RELATED:

Controversial Anti-Abortion Billboards Staying Up In Oakland

Racial Anti-Abortion Billboard Pulled Down Amid Outrage

*Correction: The previous article said that CBS Outdoor Billboard Manager Jeff McCuen didn’t think the billboards were offensive. McCuen actually never made a comment on this story, and throughout the aggregation process, the writer made a mistake by attaching his name to comments that were never made by him.*

A series of controversial anti-abortion billboards that have been erected in the predominantly Black East and West Oakland areas will not be taken down.

CBS Outdoor Billboard Manager, Jeff McCuen, has been pressured to take the billboards down.

The sixty billboards in question show a sleeping African-American baby under the phrase, “Black & Beautiful” and a link: TooManyAborted.Com/CA.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee is outraged by the billboards which have popped up all over Black neighborhoods around the country.

“I am deeply offended by the race-based billboards that are being displayed in my congressional district,” Congresswoman Barbara Lee said in a statement. “These billboards stigmatize women of color and perpetuate myths about parenting skills and the types of women who seek and use abortion services.”

Read more at Life News

RELATED:

Conservatives Target Latinas For Anti-Abortion Billboards

Alabama, Kansas, Idaho, Indiana and Oklahoma have passed laws banning abortion with the new limitation, based on the theory that the fetus can feel pain at the 20-week stage of pregnancy. That theory disputes previous contentions set by the Supreme Court that abortions cannot be banned until the fetus becomes viable, around the 24th week.

The law could significantly impact African-Americans in two of the aforementioned states, Alabama and Indiana, where the abortion rate sits around 56 percent and 28 percent respectfully, according to State Health Facts.

The law has been used as a litmus test by some Republican presidential candidates, excluding Mitt Romney and Herman Cain, who have been criticized by conservatives and pro-life advocates.

Read More At NYTimes.com

RELATED:

Black Women Once Again Targeted Pro Lifers

A Philadelphia physician, Kermitt Gosnell, was charged Wednesday with murder and other offenses for allegedly causing the death of one of his female patients and killing viable babies in illegal, late term abortions, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams said.

The babies were born alive in the sixth, seventh and eighth months of pregnancy, but their spinal cords were allegedly severed with scissors, Williams said in a statement.
Nine other people who worked in the west Philadelphia medical office, including Gosnell’s wife and sister-in-law, were also charged, Williams said. The practice, called the Women’s Medical Society, served mostly low-income minority women for years, he said.

READ MORE

VIA CHRISTIAN POST:

Despite the efforts of President Obama, the White House and Democratic leaders to change opinions, many pro-life groups are convinced that the health care bill does allow federal funds to cover abortion procedures.

Several large pro-life organizations on Monday pointed to a recent article by Factcheck.org entitled, “Abortion: Which Side is Fabricating?” as support for their argument.

The Factcheck.org article asserts that the current House bill “would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans.”

Factcheck.org is a project of The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. It takes no position on whether the health care bill should or should not allow coverage for abortions.

The article, by the site’s director Brooks Jackson, was in response to the statement released by the National Right to Life Committee following President Obama’s address to religious leaders last Wednesday.

Douglas Johnson, the NRLC’s legislative director, had said, “President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component of the health care legislation…the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions.”

According to Factcheck.org, Johnson is correct in that federal funds will be used to cover abortions.

“As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a ‘public plan’ and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions,” Jackson wrote.

Though the proposed plan does not require federal funds to be used to support abortion coverage, the analyst explained, it does allow an optional “public” insurance plan to cover abortions.

People with low to moderate income can qualify for federal subsidies to purchase both the public and private plans that cover abortion.

NRLC explained in more detail on Monday that the House bill contains language that allows the federal agency managing the “public option” to collect an additional amount of premium funds to cover the costs of elective abortions. No one would be allowed to enroll in the “public option” without paying the abortion surcharge.

The pro-life group asserts that once the government collects these funds, they are considered public or federal funds.

“When the government uses those funds to write payment checks to abortionists, that is government funding of abortion,” the NRLC arguedR.

Read more here.