Isn't bait and switch, it's the Bible, heretical as that may seem to you. Christians are not to judge other Christians on issues that are debatable.
If you say that it isn't debatable, then I hope you are not a hypocrite and using any Microsoft products, do not buy any goods manufactured, sold or handled by any publically held companies, do not pay taxes to the U.S. Government, and completely check the background and spending habits of anyone you give money to. Because if not, you are helping fund abortions according to your rationale in condemning those who work for Pampered Chef.
So we're back to the premise that the subjective moral scruples of any given individual are equally valid and that "man is the measure of all things."
it's the Bible, heretical as that may seem to you
No, it's your violent severing of St. Paul's words from their context in order to suit your momentary rhetorical needs. St. Paul never taught subjectivist morality: he taught that there was an objective standard of God-given morality in which murder was objectively, irreformably evil and in which eating sacrificial beasts was a matter of indifference. His message is clear: although eating this meat is objectively morally indifferent, it is also objectively incumbent morally on the Christian to treat his neighbor with kindness: i.e. if your eating the meat upsets your neighbor, it is an act of kindness and self-sacrifice to avoid upsetting him.
Abortion isn't a personal preference, however. St. Paul never said: "If your neighbor really wants to you to help him kill an innocent person, you should help him because it makes him feel better."
Further - there is a difference between buying something with money that may or may not be used by some third party down the road for evil and directly working for an employer who publicly and emphatically states that HE WILL use his profits in order to kill children.