Ah, so THAT was the last dollar I ever gave to Susan G Komen

Hey, so the Susan G Komen For the Cure foundation is pretty possessive these days. They've trademarked "for the cure", and apparently any charitable cause--including smaller, local causes that benefit it's own foundation--who uses "for the cure" in the title is a prime target for a lawsuit. (I also heard that "for a cure" is also their trademark, but my Google skills prove insufficient to prove or disprove this assertion.)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Note: I am all for raising money for breast cancer research, support, and awareness. There truly is no better cause. I hate cancer, especially breast cancer. Just like most of you, I know people directly affected by this hateful cancer and I normally support every effort to raise money and awareness for it. But I (among many) take issue with this lawsuit, for the following two reasons:

1. "The foundation has been around more than 30 years. It has a stellar reputation. The foundation believes it is taking the necessary steps to protect itself and its donors." Really? Because there is no possible way that there is any other cause worthy of using the outrageously creative and unique "for the cure" tagline? And because anyone not living under a rock doesn't already associate "Susan G Komen" with breast cancer, and it's efforts to cure it? How many of my donated dollars were spent on the salary of the Susan G Komen attorney I saw on NBC tonight for a 45 second sound bite? You think this is what Suzy Komen would have wanted? To spend research money on lawsuits to "protect" the foundation's reputation? Your cause, in and of itself, is your reputation, people. So, I almost don't care that you claim to have provided $200MM to research and advocacy--the Susan G Komen Foundation has also spent half a million dollars on legal fees. $500k is a lot of money to spend to sue people who also wish for a cure for something terrible, don't you think?

2. "For the Cure"--wow! That's some piece of literary genius! Who else could ever have come up with such a catchy phrase? Surely parents of certain terminally ill children--50% of whom die before two years of age from a genetic disease for which there is no treatment or cure--could never have thought up such a sophisticated slogan. Intellectual property, indeed. Eh, I guess breast cancer called shotgun first, so the rest of the diseased community is challenged to come up with it's own slogan. I shall suggest we all consider: "race for money which may or may not eradicate abc disease", "hoping for somebody to fix xyz disease", and "together, we can raise enough money to [synonym for a cure] defg disease".

I realize I'm channeling my inner Dr. Phil here, but are you kidding me? This is the most ludicrous, asinine, moronic waste of time and money ever. How are we not focusing on the main goal of curing such a wasteful, tragic disease? Keep your eye on the ball, and all that?

This post should have taken me 20 minutes, but it took me 90. I had to step away to feed my twins, put them each on the cough machine, suction their secretions, and administer their study drugs. Nobody deserves breast cancer, but nobody deserves to be born with a "if they live past age two they'll be lucky" sentence.

I believe that the Komen family truly has the community's best interest at heart, and I get that with a large organization there are sometimes large expenses.

But give. Me. A fucking. Break.

What am I missing here? Is there a key part to this story that I'm missing? Anyone want to argue with me? I'm open minded--prove to me that I'm being an ass in a logical, respectful fashion and I'll wash your car for a year*.

*not really.