Pro-lifer singlehandedly stops Avon Breast Cancer Walk drive

jewel abc.jpg

The following incident occurred Saturday at the Jewel grocery store in St. Charles, IL.

This goes to show what one pro-lifer can do, in this case stalwart Nancy Weber...

As I walked into Jewel today, I was approached by a women soliciting donations for the Avon Breast Cancer Walk.

I took a brochure and when leaving spoke to her about how this company, along with the Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, denies the link between abortion and breast cancer. In addition to that, Komen gives monies directly to Planned Parenthood. I explained in a simple way, how abortion causes breast cancer: When a women has her monthly cycle, her breasts fill with a cancer causing toxin (estrogen). When she becomes pregnant, her cycle stops for the 9-month period. That in itself has always been an indisputable key factor to lowering breast cancer. The earlier a woman completes a full-term pregnancy, the better, and the more children, the better. Breastfeeding also helps stave off breast cancer.

But in addition, when a pregnancy is suddenly aborted, breasts that were preparing to nourish a baby are left with more undifferentiated, i.e., cancer-vulnerable cells, than before she was pregnant. The fact is, abortion can increase a woman's risk factor up to 160%!

choice is abortion.jpg

As I was explaining this to the ill-informed volunteer, a woman and a man separately walked up with donations. I started explaining the ABC risk to them when the Avon rep rudely told me to leave. The man kept his money and walked out with me and thanked me!

I realized I should complain to the store manager, so I did. The lady at the counter thanked me for the info and called the manager. I told them if the Avon campaigner was not removed, I was going home to get my 6-ft. picture of an aborted baby and coming back!

Well, the manager said, he didn't think that was necessary. Still, I left for my sign, but when I got back to the store, the Avon rep was gone, praise God!

Indeed, Avon refuses to acknowledge the link between abortion and breast cancer, while dancing all around it, which would be comical if it wasn't so deadly. All highlighted risks below are due to increased estrogen exposure:

avon breast cancer.jpg

Furthermore, Avon gives some of its proceeds to the American Cancer Society, which denies the link, as well as the abortion-promoting YWCA and other pro-abortion entities, like Advocate Trinity Hospital, a sister of Christ Hospital, where I worked.

For more information on the ABC link go to the Coalition on Abortion Breast Cancer.

[Photo is of Nancy's daughter Dolores in front of the aforementioned Jewel]


Comments:

Ugh, I actually found an internet option that prevents pictures from displaying. I'll be turning that on before I visit this site from now on.
The article is quite interesting, as I've never heard a biological explanation for the breast cancer/abortion link, but the picture prevented me from reading it until my fiance informed me of this internet option.
For pro-abortion people, I honestly believe these photos have shockingly little effect. For me, they burn in my brain and send me into tears if I think about it too much. Getting a headache from stressing myself out doesn't benefit those babies one bit.

Posted by: Laura at March 23, 2009 3:48 PM


We have known this for years. It makes the expression "women's health" when on an abortion operation about as dishonest as could be.

It increases a doc's liability if he doesn't disclose a risk. It also increases his liability if he knew a risk and did not disclose it. The research on this topic is NOT politically correct and is bogged down.

If Obama gets the huge and non private national health data base, he will be able to run a program and track this pattern. It will sooner or later be a huge factor against abortion. This higher incidence of cancer starts raising more sharpley after a woman enters menopause. So many that have had an abortion, are yet to see their risks climb and it will be a few more years.

Posted by: xppc at March 23, 2009 3:56 PM


kudos to that women for standing up for her beliefs! i wish that i had the same courage. everytime i go to the store and see little girls selling their girl scout cookies i want so bad to take the adult to the side and ask them if they know where that money is going to!

Posted by: becky at March 23, 2009 4:03 PM


Laura, throughout recent history, PICTURES are what has been at the start of every civil & human rights movement.

It wasn't until pictures started to get out about what was going on in Hitler's massacre of the Jews that people finally started to get uncomfortable about what was happening. See, until then, people were able to pretend it wasn't happening. Faced with actual film and pictures of the holocaust, FINALLY people started to get loudly uncomfortable about it.

In the civil rights struggle in this country (USA), when pictures of precious black brothers hanging from trees started to get out - ONLY then were the rest of the world fed up enough to FIGHT it. Sadly, even then it took a LOT of pics to get people to finally understand.

Hard to look at? Absolutely. Necessary to get clueless people to understand WHAT abortion is? ABSOLUTELY.

I long for the day when people are more offended and appalled by the actual ACT of abortion than by pictures of it.

Posted by: Wanda at March 23, 2009 4:04 PM


Good for her!! Have joined 2 facebook groups about Susan G Komen. People get so mad at me when I tell them the truth about organizations that give to PP.
Don't shoot the messenger, people!

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 4:11 PM


Please don't detest me for saying this; I agree with you but have to voice a little protest :(...

Their transgressions aside, they care more about breast cancer than abortion. I'm not a doctor so I don't so I don't necessarily understand all of the mechanics that go with any form of cancer (although that explanation that the woman gave cleared up quite a lot, actually), but it is important to note that the preborn are not more important than anyone else. They are not less important, either. They're equal. I am not defending them and I am not defending anyone who supports abortion or its terminal effects on women, but I am saying that we ought to recognize the cancer research centers for the good that they do, too.

I don't doubt that pregnancy reduces cancer risk. I wish that larger associations would acknowledge that, but most of them are, well, larger and some of them have wealthier chairs- usually the wealthy doesn't include pro-life. It's sad, but we simply can't discredit all that they do because that would be favoring the preborn and they're not more valuable- they're equal.

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 4:25 PM


Just because a woman waits until 30 to have a child does not mean she's had an abortion. The two are not one in the same, and it hardly proves breast cancer causes abortion.

Posted by: Kate at March 23, 2009 4:34 PM


I have been an Avon rep for nearly 5 years and a staunch pro-lifer running various organisations for much longer and I had no idea that that was Avon's position.

I am horrified. I will be informing my district manager and my customers that I will no longer sell any of their breast cancer products and instead recommend a donation to a genuine charity looking at all breast cancer risk factors.

Posted by: Madeleine at March 23, 2009 4:35 PM


Kate,
Please proofread before you hit post.

Madeleine,
You go girl!!

Vannah,
Planned Parenthood would like to make it look like they are "helping" women by doing breast cancer screenings. It's a front. They continue to kill children by abortion. If you support an organization that gives to PP you support the killing.

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 4:38 PM


So ... she lied the person holding the drive. Nice. If she (the anti-choice woman) should, God forbid, get cancer herself, would she accept funds raised by or a treatment researched by Komen?

Posted by: Yo La Tengo at March 23, 2009 4:38 PM


http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_6x_Can_Having_an_Abortion_Cause_or_Contribute_to_Breast_Cancer.asp

Posted by: Kate at March 23, 2009 4:39 PM


The following organizations do not support abortion.

American Cancer Society
National Breast Cancer Foundation
Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 4:42 PM


I for one think that the abortion/breast cancer link is quite fortunate. It's karma in action. If these harlots are willing to spit on the amazing gift that God has given them, then they are asking for punishment from our Lord. Breast cancer happens to be that very punishment.

Posted by: Richard at March 23, 2009 4:50 PM


The American Cancer Society doesn't support abortion? Wonderful! :). That's quite the relief. I recently got a newsletter that says that certain California wineries donate to Planned Parenthood and today I plan on going through to make sure that none of them are the brand that my mother buys. Thanks for the list, Mrs. Carla. I don't support any group that supports abortion, but I meant that we ought to consider all that we can about every group, the good and the bad. As for Planned Parenthood, anything which they turn out has been, for some bizarre reason, around abortion. They like to be recognized as a healthcare provider...but they never lobby for better healthcare, just more restrictions on chidren's rights.

I agree, supporting them is wrong, but we ought to find a way to express, more publicly, that the preborn do not matter more than the cancer patient, and vice versa. Equality is equality.

Sorry if I was kind of vague about that.

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 4:51 PM


The results regarding abortion and breast cancer are unusual- many come up saying that, yes, abortion raises the risk, and others come up saying no, abortion does not affect cancer. However, it could have something to do with depression maybe? Studies do link depression and cancer, and perhaps women who are depressed after abortions therefore have an elevated risk, but some women truly don't care after their abortions and so perhaps their risk is lower? I don't know.

When I was twelve I swore that I found the cause of cancer, and it had to do with depression, but, now, I just kind of remember that theory and blush... :).

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 5:07 PM


Richard, many women such as moderator Carla later repent of their actions and become powerful witnesses against abortion. I think it is tragic that because of breast cancer, some women may never have the chance to have this opportunity.

Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2009 5:08 PM


Laura, throughout recent history, PICTURES are what has been at the start of every civil & human rights movement.

yes I quite agree. And to some abortion is still murder and they want NO part of it.


Posted by: angel at March 23, 2009 5:09 PM


Great job, Nancy!! We need more people like you!

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 5:10 PM


The following organizations do not support abortion.
American Cancer Society
National Breast Cancer Foundation
Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

Carla, that is wonderful to know! Thank you so much for this list.

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 5:11 PM


Wanda, I agree with you about the Holocaust, and in theory, it ought to work here, but I haven't seen that it is. Abortion opponents, from what I've seen, couldn't care less about these photos. I'm also concerned about the children that see these photos of death at pro-life rallies. I feel that it can be done in a better way. I am fascinated by photos of babies inside the womb. I think they're beautiful and touching. They're not violent or bloody at all, but they also show you that unborn children are just as human as we are.
I respect the rights of others to show these images to adults. I don't think these pictures are for children. But also, I feel that they're too much to flash around to this degree. I know your intentions are good, but I just don't agree with how it's being carried out. I'll continue to voice this opinion every time I see bloody pictures of dead babies.

Posted by: Laura at March 23, 2009 5:16 PM


One more thing, Wanda. I hope you don't think I'm more offended by a photograph than murder. I'm hoping that comment was directed at people in general.

Posted by: Laura at March 23, 2009 5:19 PM


You guys sure about the American Cancer Society? They may not support abortion, but I've read in several places, including here
http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog.php?id=2050
that they donate to PP. They also favor ESCR don't they?

Posted by: Fed Up at March 23, 2009 5:48 PM


Thank you Fed Up! I will bring that up on the FB group page!!

Lauren,
Thank you. I wasn't going to dignify that hateful comment with a response. Harlot? Wow!!

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 6:16 PM


What is the story with the Girl Scouts and abortion ???? (In reference to becky's post at 4:03 pm )

Posted by: Mike at March 23, 2009 6:20 PM


Carla, here's something a little more recent. ACS is mentioned near the end of the article.
http://www.lifenews.com/state3950.html

Posted by: Fed Up at March 23, 2009 6:27 PM


Mike,
In the link from Fed Up(Lifenews)Girl Scouts are mentioned on the boycott list. Some of the groups give to PP.

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 6:31 PM


I think the money raised from cookie sales are so the girls can do activities during the year. My oldest niece is a brownie level girl scout and my sister is a co-scout leader. I am sure she will be cautious when the girls are older before ANY material from PP is sent to the group.

When I was a girl scout, PP didn't have a relationship / link, but then........I quit scouts by the time I was 10.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at March 23, 2009 6:51 PM


I for one think that the abortion/breast cancer link is quite fortunate. It's karma in action. If these harlots are willing to spit on the amazing gift that God has given them, then they are asking for punishment from our Lord. Breast cancer happens to be that very punishment.

Posted by: Richard at March 23, 2009 4:50 PM

yeah, well women don't get pregnant by themselves and often "choose" abortion due to lack of support/abandonment by their partners

you should apologize for this crass remark.

Posted by: angel at March 23, 2009 6:59 PM


Good grief, we have to boycott everyone. Does anyone have a complete list of every corporation that donates to Planned Parenthood? At least this gives me an excuse to support little businesses.

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 8:40 PM


Life Decisions International
http://www.fightpp.org

Posted by: Carla at March 23, 2009 8:43 PM


Thank you for the links!

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 9:14 PM


Richard, you make me want to vomit. I hope to see your self-righteous behind in hell.

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 23, 2009 10:07 PM


Hi, PrettyinPink!

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 10:12 PM


"her breasts fill with a cancer causing toxin (estrogen)"

Also, this sentence is so wrong I don't know where to start.

Why not with, since when did a naturally cyclic hormone become a "cancer causing toxin"???

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 23, 2009 10:16 PM


Hey Vannah! Hows it goin?

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 23, 2009 10:21 PM


Slightly daunting. I read too much into the news- all these sad stories that make me wonder how much of a chance that pro-life has of making it. Have you ever read so much negativity that you wonder if pursuing a cause is virtual suicide? Ah, it makes me feel better to find a friendly voice!

How is it going with you? All's well, I pray.

Posted by: Vannah at March 23, 2009 10:37 PM


"I for one think that the abortion/breast cancer link is quite fortunate. It's karma in action. If these harlots are willing to spit on the amazing gift that God has given them, then they are asking for punishment from our Lord. Breast cancer happens to be that very punishment.

Posted by: Richard at March 23, 2009 4:50 PM"

Richard:

I don't think God actively punishes people like that. I think He lovingly warns people and then allows bad things to happen to us in discipline and only for our ultimate good. But He never gives us more than we can handle. I don't see how punishing a woman with breast cancer for having an abortion makes any sense. This is not the God I know.

About 16 years ago I almost lost my then 11 year old son. I couldn't help but think it was a punishment from God. After many months of prayer I realized it was just part of the trials of life.

While God hates abortion He also loves the people that do them. I do think though, that He gives enough grace for repentance. Some women have abortions out of ignorance or fear or whatever. Now, if a woman has three or four abortions and she knows they are wrong and hurt God's heart, that's open for debate as to what God will do. I would not want to be in her shoes.

I mean if God punished people for all the bad things we all do all the time, none of us would be alive. I've done some pretty nasty things that from an OT perspective would have called for my death. Yes I have repented but only because God gave me 2nd and 3rd and 4th chances.

Again, that is not to say that someone who is continually and willfully rebellious will not be judged in some way but I don't think without many, many warnings and chances to change.

Posted by: HisMan at March 23, 2009 10:55 PM


Why not with, since when did a naturally cyclic hormone become a "cancer causing toxin"???

Hi PIP. :-) Look up "estrogen dominance" and you'll find a wealth of information on the subject.
:)

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 11:00 PM


Here's something interesting...

"It's disconcerting to think that a natural hormone circulating in significant amounts through the bodies of half the world's population is a carcinogen, but it's now official. In December the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) added estrogen to its list of known cancer-causing agents.

For years, estrogen has been a suspected carcinogen, since strong epidemiological evidence associates the hormone to breast, endometrial, and uterine cancers. Women who begin menstruating early, or who start menopause late, produce more estrogen over their lifetimes and have a higher risk of breast cancer. Recently, the clinical trial of estrogen plus progestin treatment therapy was terminated because of an increased risk of breast cancer."

Read more here:
http://www.cumc.columbia.edu/news/in-vivo/Vol2_Iss10_may26_03/index.html

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 11:04 PM


And something else:

PHILADELPHIA – Women whose breast cancer came back after treatment had almost twice as much estrogen in their blood than did women who remained cancer-free – despite treatment with anti-estrogen drugs in a majority of the women –according to researchers in a study published in the March issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

The findings suggest that high levels of estrogen contribute to an increased risk of cancer recurrence, just as they lead to the initial development of breast cancer, said the study’s lead author, Cheryl L. Rock, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine at the University of California, San Diego.

“While this makes sense, there have been only a few small studies that have looked at the link between sex hormones in the blood and cancer recurrence,” she said. “This is the largest study to date and the only one to have included women taking agents such as tamoxifen to reduce estrogen’s effect on cancer growth.

“What the results mean for women who have already been treated for breast cancer is that they should do as much as they can to reduce estrogen in their blood, such as exercising frequently and keeping weight down,” she added. “Taking anti-estrogen drugs like tamoxifen may not completely wipe out the hormone’s effect in women who have high levels of estrogen.”

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-03/aafc-hlo030408.php

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 11:09 PM


Don't worry Vannah- it'll get better :)

Bethany- estrogen is linked to breast cancer, but I certainly would not consider it a "toxin." Excess cholesterol is also bad for the heart, but it certainly isn't a "toxin." These are both quite necessary for the body to function regularly.

Toxin:
"A poisonous substance, especially a protein, that is produced by living cells or organisms and is capable of causing disease when introduced into the body tissues but is often also capable of inducing neutralizing antibodies or antitoxins."

Estrogen (like cholesterol) is already in body tissues and perform specific functions for them; it is naturally produced by the body; the minute the woman's body develops antibodies against its own hormones is the minute I'd get her some medical treatment.

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 23, 2009 11:16 PM


Okay I see what you are saying now.. but if it is produced in excess, it can act like a toxin, which I'm sure is what she meant.

Posted by: Bethany at March 23, 2009 11:21 PM


Kate - thank you for posting that.

I am not a MD. I do not do cancer research. I have no background in biology. Though I may disagree with the results, I believe results like this. I believe that scientists know better than I do. Sometimes I wish the results were different, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong. I think we should put faith in the doctors and scientists who do such dedicated research, and believe their results. Withholding our money from a great charity like Komen, thus preventing critical research that can save lives, does nothing for the women in our lives! Support breast cancer research!

Posted by: Whitney at March 24, 2009 12:36 AM


PiP, 10:16p, first, hi! Second, estrogen is a known carcinogen. Google "estrogen carcinogen."

That is why less exposure to estrogen decreases the risk of breast cancer and vice versa. Even the other side admits this much. Read Avon's list of risks. They all have to do with increased exposure to estrogen.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 24, 2009 5:03 AM


Kate and Whitney,
I will support organizations that do breast cancer research and DO NOT support PP and abortion.

Posted by: Carla at March 24, 2009 6:50 AM


Bethany- estrogen is linked to breast cancer, but I certainly would not consider it a "toxin." Excess cholesterol is also bad for the heart, but it certainly isn't a "toxin." These are both quite necessary for the body to function regularly.

Estrogen can be a "toxin" in this sense if it's not in the body at the right levels and under the proper natural circumstances. "Unopposed" estrogen is "toxic" to perimenopausal women for instance.

Posted by: angel at March 24, 2009 7:21 AM


About 16 years ago I almost lost my then 11 year old son. I couldn't help but think it was a punishment from God. After many months of prayer I realized it was just part of the trials of life.

ah, this is very sad to hear. I am so very sorry about this HisMan. I can't imagine enduring the loss of a child. And I agree, this was NOT a punishment from God. God bless you.

Posted by: angel at March 24, 2009 7:24 AM


Jill and Angel, as I've said before, I know that estrogen is linked to breast cancer and such, and abnormal levels of estrogen contribute as risk factors.

However, as I said before, "toxin" is the wrong word, unless you want to also call cholesterol a toxin. As said before, most hormones, steroids, and proteins acting in abnormal levels can cause pathologies, however, I doubt none of them would classify these hormones as a toxin. The natural hormone changes involved in a woman's cycle almost always involve estrogen. Do you have an antidote for estrogen, in case you get poisoned?? See how weird that sounds?

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 24, 2009 8:02 AM


I have refused to give to SGK and the Avon Walk for many years. I'm with Carla, I donate to those who don't contribute to PP.

Posted by: Kristen at March 24, 2009 8:15 AM


PIP: perhaps carcinogen is a better term?

Posted by: angel at March 24, 2009 8:40 AM


I'd rather give $ to an organization who really wants to find a cure and doesn't give $ to an organization like PP. Why don't they use the $ raised to actually do RESEARCH to find a cure or at least create better treatments that can increase survival rates?


I'm at risk for Breast Cancer and so is my sister, due to our mother's cancer at 33 years old. Luckily, she's a 29 year survivor.


Posted by: LizFromNebraska at March 24, 2009 8:42 AM


And Hey Jill! Hope you are doing well.

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 24, 2009 8:47 AM


Yes angel probably carcinogen, or maybe you could just say in her scenario (disputes about its truth aside), "the breasts fill up with estrogen, which can contribute to breast cancer in abnormal levels." Or "the breasts fill up with estrogen, which can act as a carcinogen."

Posted by: prettyinpink at March 24, 2009 8:51 AM


"Why don't they use the $ raised to actually do RESEARCH to find a cure or at least create better treatments that can increase survival rates?--Liz"
=============================================

Because PP is NOT in the business of healthcare, better treatment or increasing survival rates of their patients. They are in the business of making $$ and promoting a promiscuous lifestyle which will end up being more $$ for them.

They are very much like how drug dealers operate...in the end, they are just merchants of Death and the Culture of Death.

Posted by: RSD at March 24, 2009 10:49 AM


With all do respect to HisMan, murder is murder in the eyes of God.

"The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” -Revelation 21:7-8

Posted by: Richard at March 24, 2009 11:23 AM


With all due respect Richard even though you called me a harlot...I have been forgiven and set free by God for my abortion. Jesus was crucified, died and rose again for my sin.

Good day, sir.

Posted by: Carla at March 24, 2009 12:34 PM


I remember reading that abortions are one of the only procedures done with NO statistics or information on the effects on the would-be mother. (ie. California keeps very little data on the abortions done in that state). If this were another procedure, there would be study after study of the effects (just like the recent news about prostate exams not being of much of a benefit). I beleive the link is there, so what do we have to do to get the medical professionals to see this, especially a procedure done how many thousands of times a day here in the US alone.

Posted by: lovethemboth at March 24, 2009 1:10 PM


It is a pity that quack science with an openly anti-abortion agenda was permitted to interfere with fundraising for a good cause.

Posted by: Ray at March 24, 2009 1:30 PM


Hey PIP,

give us a break. Don't divert attention from the real issue.

too much of anything in the body can be toxic or rise to 'toxic' levels. Even drinking to much water can be toxic.


Posted by: Jasper at March 24, 2009 1:49 PM


Ray,

Whether one believes there is a breast cancer-abortion connection or not, the fact that Avon contributes money to Planned Parenthood is enough to convince me to send my money elsewhere.

Posted by: Janet at March 24, 2009 1:50 PM


Jill,
I love your moving headlines! Very snazzy! Is it Chris' handiwork?

Posted by: Janet at March 24, 2009 1:52 PM


Oh my gosh, how crazy is this?

300 American jobs in Alabama are at stake!

U.S. move to cheaper Chinese condoms threatens American jobs

http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/1100966.html

Posted by: Janet at March 24, 2009 1:58 PM


too much of anything in the body can be toxic or rise to 'toxic' levels. Even drinking to much water can be toxic.

Yes, and do we call water a toxin? Do we say, "After marathons, people ingest a brain-swelling toxin (water)"? No. Because even though water can be toxic, it's no more a toxin than just about anything else in the world.

Posted by: Alexandra at March 24, 2009 2:21 PM


Hey everyone! I have a good site for you all to see abort73.com. This is a good site for pro-choice people to see.

Posted by: alice at March 24, 2009 7:26 PM


I just became a rep for Avon; now I see this website...yikes! Should I just drop it, or just not sell the things to do with breast cancer? I haven't gotten far into it to where it would be hard to back out of it.

Posted by: Carrie at April 9, 2009 4:45 PM


Whatever your view is on this subject, I recommend checking out any facts that anyone on a message board ever gives you, and not simply doing someone's will because it agrees with your views. Do your research regardless.

Posted by: sandra at April 26, 2009 11:12 PM


You have too much time on your hands. I understand the cause that you are fighting for and believe wholeheartedly that good can be done without insulting others. Please do not disregard Susan B Komen foundation as a wonderful positive source for funding. While some of their money may support PP most of their money does support breast cancer.
Also please look past girl scouts link to pp. Accept them for what they are.

Posted by: Michelle at June 3, 2009 3:01 PM