Connect with us

Komen: The Extreme Anti-Gay Views Of Their VP Who Dumped Planned Parenthood

Published

on

When Nancy Brinker, the founder and CEO of Susan G. Komen For The Cure hired Karen Handel as her Senior Vice President, she knew what she was getting. Handel, who joined Komen in April of 2011, had not only previously worked for Komen, but had been Georgia’s Secretary of State and had run for Governor of the Peach Tree State as well. As it turns out, Handel’s move to the Dallas, Texas based breast cancer non-profit was not a huge transition for her personal politics: she is 100% anti-gay. In a 21st century United States of America, where the majority support same-sex marriage, and the majority support a women’s right to choose, it’s unconscionable that the Susan G. Komen Foundation would hire someone so rabidly against the gay community and women. But Nancy Brinker — whose last-ditch effort to lie her way out of a public relations nightmare yesterday in an interview with breast-cancer survivor and MSNBC anchor and veteran journalist Andrea Mitchell proved disastrous — did just that: hire as senior VP a woman opposed to women’s rights and gay rights. If that was in fact her goal, she accomplished it in expert fashion. Let’s be perfectly clear here: Komen does not fund abortions at Planned Parenthood. Their Planned Parenthood funding was used for women’s health and especially for mammograms, a direct tie-in with the Komen mission to reduce and cure breast cancer. So, their defunding of Planned Parenthood was merely a malicious and political move. Period. And it’s important to see through today’ well-planned PR smokescreen:

READ: Why You Still Shouldn’t Trust Susan G. Komen, Even After Their Reversal

Below is a 2010 interview with former Georgia politician and Komen VP Karen Handel, which focuses on then-candidate Handel’s positions on gay rights, gay adoption, and gay marriage, just one year prior to her joining Komen in 2011. Almost amusingly, Handel in the beginning of the video attempts to minimalize her association with the Georgia chapter of the L0g Cabin Republicans, the gay Republican group of which she was a dues-paying member, and which actually endorsed her two years running. And throughout, but especially at the end of the interview, Handel flat out acknowledges her ignorance and bigotry. Local Georgia reporter Doug Richards asks, “I guess I want to know why you don’t think gay parents are as legitimate and heterosexual parents?” Handel’s uppity response: “Because I don’t.” Here’s the complete transcript, and the video from reporter Richards:

Handel:  (The Log Cabin Republican check is) certainly not a membership.  And I don’t think going to an event constitutes membership, nor does it constitute agreeing with everything they have to say either. Richards:  Why did you do that? A:  Well, when you’re out campaigning — remember, I was campaigning for Fulton County Commission — so I think it was important for me to speak to all the various Republican groups.  Let’s remember a lot of Republicans have spoken to the Log Cabin organization, from, I think (Senator Johnny) Isakson has spoken, Sonny Perdue has spoken.  It was part of going out and trying to run a comprehensive campaign.  And the key, I think, was to make sure that I was doing the outreach with folks.  And it was better to not have folks be adversarial against me, and so that was the whole point of it. Q:  You said there were issues where you may have agreed and disagreed on.  What were the issues you agreed with them on? A:  From taxes and cutting the spending at Fulton County and candidly, the organization was a good ally on those types of fiscal issues. Q:  You have said that you are — you’re against gay marriage, right? A:  Mm hm.  Absolutely.  Marriage is between one man and one woman.  And I’ve been very very clear about that.  And the record is clear about any of the other issues like domestic partner benefits or anything like that.  In fact in Fulton, I voted no on domestic partner benefits. Q:  Are you against civil unions for gays? A:  Yes.  I think that’s not an issue that has come forward in Georgia.  We have the constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and I don’t want to see any taxpayer funding going toward benefits etcetera for a couple that is not married.  In our state and for me, marriage is for one man and one woman. Q:  Why is that? A:  Why is marriage between one man and one woman?  (Laughs).  Are you serious? Q:  Yes.  Well why — do you view committed gay relationships as being less legitimate than committed heterosexual relationships? A:  As a Christian, I view relationships and marriage as being between a man and a woman. Q:  But what about the legitimacy of the relationship?  Do you have any gay friends?  Do you know gay couples? A:  Of course I do.  Are we going to spend our whole day talking on this issue? Q:  I want to know how you feel about this. A:  I’ve been very clear.  And you know, as a Christian, marriage is between a man and a woman.  I do not think that gay relationships are — they are not what God intended.  And that’s just my viewpoint on it.  Others might disagree with that.  But I would also hope that if you look at what is happening in our state, we’ve got issues we need to be focused on in Georgia.  We have a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.  And it’s something that I supported wholeheartedly.  We have that, and let’s get dealing with the other issues that we also need to deal with in Georgia.  And the press can help with that.  (Laughs). Q:  Frequently, folks in the legislature kind of threaten to — there are always rumblings in the legislature that they may outlaw gay adoptions.  You’re against gay adoption. A:  I am against gay adoption.  But remember — I mean, if there is legislation on  that, certainly I will follow that and look at it.  But in the end, ultimately courts are going to be the ones to have to make the decision on that and it’s always in the best interests of the child.  Do I think that gay parents is in the best interest of the child?  No.  But we do have our court system that deals with many and most of those issues. Q:  Would you favor outlawing gay adoptions? A:  Yeah, I would consider that, absolutely. Q:  Do you know any gay couples with children? A:  Not that I’m aware of. Q:  So you think gay couples are less qualified to function as parents than straight couples? A:  I think that for a child to be in a household — in a family in a household with a situation where the parents are not married, as in one man and one woman, is not the best household for a child. Q:  Is it better or worse than a single parent household? A:  Doug, I’m really trying to be straightforward with you but I’m not going to debate all the nuances.  I’ve made it abundantly clear that I think that marriage is between a man and a woman.  And that’s what I believe, and I don’t know what more you would like me to add to that. Q:  I guess I want to know why you think gay parents aren’t as legitimate as heterosexual parents. A:  Because I don’t. Q:  (Pause)  Well, I realize that. A:  Well, Doug, we’re not going to spend the whole day discussing this issue.  And you know, it ‘s really kind of disappointing — we invited you on this (leg of the bus trip). Q:  I know. A:  So we’re going to need to move on. Hat-tip: Aaron Furtado Baldwin and Wendy Equal Leigh

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Rogan on Epstein Files: ‘Looks Terrible’ for Trump

Published

on

Prominent podcaster Joe Rogan warned that the handling of the Epstein files “looks terrible” for President Donald Trump and his administration.

“During Tuesday and Thursday’s episodes, Rogan criticized redactions the Department of Justice made from the files,” The Hill reported.

“Who knows what f — — happens with all this Epstein files s — —,” he said, according to video of his streaming show. “It just keeps getting crazier and crazier and crazier and deeper and deeper.”

“Why would your name be redacted if you’re not a victim?” Rogan also asked. “Like, this is what’s crazy about all this. Like, how come you redact some people and you don’t redact other people?”

READ MORE: Far Right Extremist Leader Puts Trump on Notice Over Epstein Files

“Like, what is this?” the podcaster continued. “This is not good. None of this is good for this administration. It looks f — — terrible. It looks terrible. It looks terrible for Trump when he was saying that none of this was real. This is all a hoax. This is not a hoax. Like, did you not know?”

“Maybe he didn’t know if you want to be charitable? But this is definitely not a hoax. And if you’ve got redacted people’s names, and these people aren’t victims, you’re not protecting the victim. So what are you doing?”

“And how come all this s — — is not released?” Rogan asked.

 

READ MORE: ‘No Going Back’: Report Warns Post-MAGA America Will Never Be the Same

 

Continue Reading

News

Far Right Extremist Leader Puts Trump on Notice Over Epstein Files

Published

on

Far-right extremist livestreamer Nick Fuentes — who leads a “Groyper” following of mostly young men and brands himself “America First” — is putting President Donald Trump on notice ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

“I won’t even consider voting in the midterms unless the Epstein Files are fully unredacted, mass deportations resume, and we don’t go to war with Iran,” wrote Fuentes, who has 1.2 million followers on the X social media platform.

Some of Trump’s MAGA allies were furious this week as Attorney General Pam Bondi deflected numerous questions in a congressional hearing on that very topic.

Even before Bondi’s widely-criticized performance, Fuentes had called for her impeachment.

READ MORE: Trump’s Pardon ‘Blizzard’ Grows With Clemency for Five Former NFL Players

“Pam Bondi needs to be impeached,” he said on his February 9 Rumble show, “America First,” as The Daily Beast reported. “You lied about the existence of the files. You lied about unindicted collaborators and accomplices.”

Fuentes has been described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “white nationalist,” an “admirer of fascists,” and someone who “frequently relies on antisemitic tropes.”

According to the Anti-Defamation League, “Fuentes has used his platforms to make numerous antisemitic, racist, homophobic and misogynistic comments,” and spreads “white supremacist propaganda.”

President Trump “has not condemned Fuentes,” and Vice President JD Vance “has only criticized him for attacking his wife,” The Week reported last month. “But Vance also appears keen to avoid alienating young Fuentes supporters, who could help him secure the GOP presidential nomination in 2028.”

READ MORE: ‘No Going Back’: Report Warns Post-MAGA America Will Never Be the Same

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s Pardon ‘Blizzard’ Grows With Clemency for Five Former NFL Players

Published

on

President Donald Trump issued another batch of pardons on Thursday, granting clemency to five former NFL players — the latest in what the Cato Institute has labeled a “blizzard” of pardons.

Trump’s pardon czar Alice Marie Johnson praised the move, which covers cases including those involving drug-related offenses and perjury convictions, according to The Guardian,

“Today, the President granted pardons to five former NFL players—Joe Klecko, Nate Newton, Jamal Lewis, Travis Henry, and the late great Dr. Billy Cannon,” wrote Johnson. “As football reminds us, excellence is built on grit, grace, and the courage to rise again. So is our nation.”

Johnson went on to applaud the president “for his continued commitment to second chances.”

“Mercy changes lives,” she added.

READ MORE: ‘No Going Back’: Report Warns Post-MAGA America Will Never Be the Same

The Cato Institute on Wednesday had said the scope and magnitude of Trump’s “blizzard” of pardons are “unprecedented.”

Before this latest round of pardons, Trump had issued 166 pardons — plus the mass pardons of about 1,500 people convicted on charges in connection with January 6 — since taking office just over one year ago. By comparison, President Joe Biden in four years issued 80 pardons.

“In other words,” Cato’s Dan Greenberg wrote, “even putting aside the rioters’ collective pardon, Trump is now issuing pardons at eight times the rate Biden did.”

READ MORE: ‘Political Stunt’: Trump Admin Rages After NYC Re-Raises Pride Flag at Stonewall

Greenberg put Trump’s pardons into several categories.

He noted that Biden’s pardons eliminated about $680,000 in penalties owed to victims or the federal government, whereas Trump’s pardons have wiped away about $1.5 billion.

Greenberg also said that “Trump has normalized the pardoning of disgraced politicians, such as former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernandez (who orchestrated a spree of state-sponsored drug trafficking leading to a 45-year prison term),” and others, such as Nevada legislator Michele Fiore, Virginia sheriff Scott Jenkins, Tennessee House Speaker Glen Casada, and Arkansas legislator Jeremy Hutchinson.

Other concerns Greenberg noted are that aspects of some of Trump’s pardons “set off alarm bells for self-corruption—either of the president or of his associates.”

Finally, “Trump has increasingly focused on providing pardons to his campaign supporters who stretched or broke the law, such as John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, and Jenna Ellis.”

READ MORE: ‘Politically Toxic’: Voters Say Biden Was Better Than Trump

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.