When the Associated Press reported on January 31, 2012, that Susan G. Komen for the Cure was defunding Planned Parenthood abortion mills, I immediately thought, "It's about time that Komen, a cancer research foundation, stops funding Planned Parenthood, what with the well-known causal link between abortion and breast cancer."
But after reading the story, I was astonished to find no mention of the link between abortion and breast cancer (ABC).
Look, it's a rather well-known fact that many worldwide researchers have studied abortion and breast cancer, and issued statements describing their inter-relationship for decades now. It's just that the mainstream media doesn't report on this, because they lean left, and therefore this story is not politically expedient. However, now that the cat's out of the bag, and Komen is disassociating from Planned Parenthood, you'd think the newspaper reporter would speculate about the reason behind the disassociation.
No. The reporter didn't discuss this news event from the breast cancer angle. Instead, the story told the basic fact that Susan G. Komen Foundation has made a policy decision. "Komen said it could not continue to fund Planned Parenthood because it has adopted new guidelines that bar it from funding organizations under congressional investigation."
As a citizen who gives a regular percentage of my income to charity, I like to make sure that the recipients are not involved in scandal, fraud, misappropriation of funds and whatnot. But why didn't the newspaper reporter go deeper? The article stated that Komen's decision not to give to such organizations was a new policy. What led to that new policy? Was it the research scientists at Komen crying foul at the idea of donating money to an abortion provider, which in turn performs abortions, which in turn causes breast cancer in some patients? Was it the new Vice President, Karen Handel, steering corporate policy in a pro-life direction?