“Help us get 26.2 or 13.1 miles closer to a world without breast cancer” -> “Help us run over poor women on the way to the bank”
Sounds about right.
Why look, it’s a list of reasons to support Susan G. Komen for the Cure!
http://www.netrootsfoundation.org/2012/02/how-komen-flushed-their-brand-in-24-hours/
The lesson for nonprofits here is you have to always bring strategic decisions back to your mission and your supporters. How would they perceive it? Mission statements aren’t something top of mind every day and they usually aren’t something we can rattle off in an elevator. But that’s why they exist, to guide you as things like this come up.
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/02/02/komen-controversy-rages-twenty-two-senators-sign-letter-opposing-komens-actions
Twenty-two Democratic Senators have signed on to a strongly-worded letter urging Komen to reverse its decision.
“That’s a significant number of Senators for a letter of this nature,” writes Sargeant, “and it makes it more likely that this fight will escalate in a huge way, if Republican Senators begin speaking out in defense of the decision, as David Vitter has. More signatories are likely.”
Apparently I’m quite the threat. All my truthiness was a little too much for them to handle. Honestly #FetusLobby, I’m flattered.
And thankfully I got screenshots of all my major comments in the event something like this happened. [I’m going to try to come back…
http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/09/breast-cancer-komen-bpa
“So it may come as a surprise that Komen has posted statements on its website that dismiss links between the common chemical bisphenol A (BPA) and breast cancer, even while funding research that explores that possible connection. “
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/02/417626/komen-head-claims-response-to-planned-parenthood-decision-is-very-very-favorable/?mobile=nc
“A brief survey of the actual responses indicates that “favorable” must be Brinker’s coded way of saying “overwhelmingly negative.” As Mitchell noted, the Komen foundation’s Facebook pageis riddled with disgust over the decision and promises to cease donations to the charity. “Shame shame shame,” reads one of the thousands of negative comments. Indeed numerous donors — including Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) — have pulled their support.”
During his “Tip of the Hat, Wag of the Finger” segment last night, Stephen Colbert satirically tipped his hat to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation after learning from HuffPost that the foundation has been using donor money to go after smaller charities who have the audacity to use the phrase “for the Cure” in their own efforts to battle cancer.
Anybody who knows me knows I am a huge supporter of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, which raises millions of dollars a year in the fight against breast cancer … So I’m giving a big Tip of my Hat to the Komen foundation for spending almost a million dollars a year in donor funds to sue these other groups. If they don’t own the phrase “for the Cure,” then people might donate money thinking it’s going to an organization dedicated to curing cancer, when instead it’s wasted on organizations dedicated to curing cancer.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/04/colbert-komen-cure-cancer_n_804233.html