When the Susan B. Komen Foundation announced last week its decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood, the immediate and strong reaction was resoundingly negative – as it should have been. The funding, which paid for cancer screenings, was not instrumental to Planned Parenthood’s survival, but pulling it was a profound political statement about the organization’s value. It was the wrong statement to make and Americans quickly and loudly said so.

Despite its longstanding commitment to and provision of women’s health services that go far beyond family planning, Planned Parenthood has been pigeon-holed by anti-abortion advocates as an organization whose primary function is to provide abortions. This false construction has gained momentum in places where it should not have, namely Congress, where an investigation has been launched into how federal funding of the organization is spent – with an eye toward whether it is being used for abortion services – something that federal law prohibits, in most cases. Planned Parenthood was similarly pilloried during last spring’s budget debate, during which Democrats blocked a proposed ban on all federal funding for the organization.

The Komen Foundation based its decision to pull the funding on newly adopted internal foundation rules preventing it from making grants to organizations that are under investigation. Its decision was accompanied by a statement that attempted to neutralize the factors that led to it: “We regret that these new policies have impacted some long-standing grantees, such as Planned Parenthood, but want to be absolutely clear that our grant-making decisions are not about politics.” In justifying the cuts based on a politically driven investigation that is largely, if not wholly, fueled by abortion politics – and not the women’s health issues that the Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood are united in addressing – the Komen Foundation could not have made a more political statement.

The collective cry of “foul” could not have been more resounding, and with it came dollars – 3 million of them in the last week – to back the widespread recognition that Planned Parenthood serves a vital function in providing a broad range of women’s health services. Narrowing the discussion to one that centers just around abortion, the public said, is neither an accurate acknowledgement of Planned Parenthood’s role as a health-care provider, nor an acceptable justification for pulling support of crucial services that have no political association.

Despite a 24-hour attempt to defend its decision – including claims from its director that it had received “very, very favorable” feedback – the Komen Foundation ultimately realized that the cessation of funding was nothing but political in nature and rightly restored the support. That quick response, which came two days after the initial announcement of the split between the two organizations, reveals just how much so – and that despite differences in opinion on divisive issues such as abortion, most Americans can and do support access to basic health services, and those organizations that provide the services. If there was an apolitical position in this episode, that was it.

In the offing, too, Planned Parenthood has been handed an opportunity to once again assert the full range of its identity, and transcend the narrow definition its opponents would like to brand it with, and the Komen Foundation has had a lesson in how the underlying politics that drive an organization have the potential to put it at odds with its mission. In sorting this out, both Planned Parenthood and the Komen Foundation gained much, however hard-earned the growth.