ABCNews.com is reporting that a pro-life contractor has organized a successful boycott which has halted the construction of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The clinic was set to offer abortions as well as other health services. It seems the large contractor sent letters to other sub-contractors indicating that they should not work on the project because the end result would be countless abortions. I imagine he indicated that he would publish a list of any subs who participated and distribute that list to pro-life members who would in turn not do future business with those subs. It's an interesting tactic and is being called "intimidation and harrassment" by Planned Parenthood.

I often wonder what folks think about such things. For example, if a company as large as Pepsi were to hire O.J. Simpson to do commercials for them and some women's activist group organized a boycott against Pepsi because they felt Pepsi was hiring a murderer (although O.J. was not found guilty), would there be anything wrong with that? Is it intimidation or is it simply indicating what people want to have their dollars supporting? There was also the CBS fiasco where they pulled the Reagan movie amid rumors of corporate pressures. Is it wrong for folks to use their buying power to indicate what they do and do not approve of?

Personally, I refuse to watch certain channels because of their politics or other representations and I don't buy products from companies where the same occurs. I tend to think that is my right and possibly my responsibility to do such things and had never viewed it as intimidation in the traditional sense. Planned Parenthood seems to disagree. Perhaps I am missing something?

DISCLOSURE: I am pro-life.