The money that Pampered Chef gets doesn't go straight into the pockets of abortionists. If those dispicable programs get 1/1000 of a cent for every $100 Pampered Chef order I would be surprised. Yet, in the example I give, their windshield wiper money probably provides the same amount of money to the child killers.
Name any company that is publically held and I can draw you a line how any purchase you make from them will cause a portion of your money to end up in the hands of an abortionist. Any publically held company sells stock. At least one person who holds any company's stock will be someone who gives a donation to Planned Parenthood. Thus, buying anything sold, produced, or handled by a publically held company supports abortion a small amount.
This is why this whole concept is ridiculous, it assumes that we have a moral obligation to follow our money through the whole flow.
What if the guy instead of buying a blizzard went to a strip club? That's a pretty short series of steps for your money to be supporting something you might find immoral.
1) You
2) Auto-shop
3) Rusty
4) Tina at the Pink Pussycat
Compare that too,
1) You
2) Pampered Chef
3) The Berkshire Hathaway Company that owns Pampered Chef
4) Berkshire Hathaway
5) The Berkshire Hathaway Foundation
6) Various pro-abortion groups
5 steps to get to the evil Child killers from you, while Tina got her stripping money in 3 steps. How many steps are you responsible for your money? If it's more than one, I suggest you make charts like this for all of your purchases. Who know, Rusty may have given to Planned Parenthood, would that have made the windshield wipers more evil than the Blizzard?