Did Planned Parenthood Lie to Try to Hurt Wal-Mart?

     As many of you will remember, back in mid 1999, Wal-Mart announced that it would not carry Preven, a "morning after" pill, which causes the abortion of a newly fertilized ovum if it's taken within the first 72 hours after conception.

     There has been a lot of speculation as to why Wal-Mart would refuse to carry the abortifacient, much of it not to Wal-Mart's benefit, but I want to point out that, in my research, I discovered that they not only don't carry Preven, but they also don't cover contraceptives with their employees' insurance policies. In September of 2002, they were named in a class-action lawsuit intended to force them to include contraception with their employees' insurance coverage. So, perhaps there were some financial reasons for Wal-Mart not providing Preven, but there is obviously more here than meets the eye, as I intend to illustrate.

     The September after Wal-Mart announced it would not carry Preven, Planned Parenthood issued a press release which made it seem as if Wal-Mart had at least partially reversed its decision, and had come to an agreement with Planned Parenthood. According to Planned Parenthood, Wal-Mart agreed that "...the pharmacists won't unload his or her religious beliefs on their customers. When customers come in to get emergency contraceptives, either the pharmacy must fill it or refer them to another store, even if it's to a competitor."

     Snippets like the following can still be found on web sites across the internet: "Wal-Mart revised its policy on Preven in September, 1999, gaining the approval of Planned Parenthood. Wal-Mart still does not carry the drug, but they are obligated to point customers to pharmacies that will fill the order. Plus, they will still dispense contraceptive pills that, taken in high doses, have similar effects to Preven."

     Whether Wal-Mart had actually reversed its policy or not, the "sound byte" had been heard by the general public, and the poison was taking effect. You can imagine the furor this caused with the pro-life groups. Wal-Mart was placed on Boycott lists across the country.

     One pro-life web site contacted Wal-Mart, and obtained the following statement from them: "Wal-Mart Stores Inc. does not have an agreement of any kind with Planned Parenthood. Recently, it has been inaccurately reported that Wal-Mart pharmacists were referring customers to Planned Parenthood as part of a Wal-Mart policy. This is simply not true. Wal-Mart pharmacists are trained professionals who are given the autonomy to give independent professional counsel to their customers."

     Now, who's lying here? Either Wal-Mart is really playing footsies under the table with Planned Parenthood, or Planned Parenthood deliberately put out a lie about Wal-Mart. Let's take a look at that, and see who stands to gain from this.

     As early as 1997, Planned Parenthood was threatening to boycott Wal-Mart because of their refusal to carry Preven. For some reason, the boycott never came off, and in 1999, they were still trying to encourage people to boycott Wal-Mart. By May 2001, Planned Parenthood was still harping on Wal-Mart for not carrying Preven, and in fact stated: "In 1999, PPNYC alerted the public that Wal-Mart, the third-largest pharmacy system in the United States, refused to stock or dispense EC (emergency contraception.) Unfortunately, in 2001, Wal-Mart's 'business decision' has not changed."

     Now - this is in direct contradiction to their 1999 press release wherein they claimed that Wal-Mart had agreed to work with them. Either Wal-Mart did work with them, which I want to remind you that Wal-Mart denies, or Wal-Mart didn't agree to work with them. If Wal-Mart agreed to work with them in 1999, then why was Planned Parenthood saying that Wal-Mart's decision had "not changed" in 2001? I haven't seen any proof that Wal-Mart worked with them, but I've seen plenty of evidence that Planned Parenthood is upset with Wal-Mart.

     While I can't prove it, this is what I believe: Planned Parenthood was not able to fire up the pro-death side enough to saddle Wal-Mart with an effective boycott, so they lied. They contrived a "press release" that falsely implicated Wal-Mart of pushing Planned Parenthood's deadly agenda, and thus put Wal-Mart in bad odor with the pro-life groups. That brought about the desired effect: Wal-Mart was being boycotted, and the added bonus was that the boycott was coming from the pro-lifers. Ah! What delicious irony that must have been to Planned Parenthood!

A request, and an apology, from MRM:

     The Boycott for Life list which we've been using was obtained, in toto, from St. Antoninus Institute. We first saw it on EWTN. We assumed, because of its source, that the list was up to date, and that we were safe in posting it for our people.

     When the 2002 list came out, we updated our own, thinking that we were providing everyone with the absolute latest companies that fund the abortion industry. I've since discovered that this is far from the truth. In the process of that discovery, I also found the information on Wal-Mart and Planned Parenthood. We can't continue to rely on the St. Antoninus list, because by the time they update their list, it appears that it's already outdated.

     Because of the list being so far out of date, companies that have stopped funding abortion have been unfairly kept on the list, and companies that are new abortion mill donors continue to receive the funds and trust of good people. Please, dear readers, accept my apology.

     We want to keep the list up to date, but here is our dilemma:

     The only group that appears to put out a current pro-life list not only charges for the list, they also copyright it. Can you imagine? I can understand their charging for the list, since their research does cost them time and money. However, copyrighting it shows what their real bottom line is. Even if I bought their list, I could not put it on the MRM web site to share it with you. I guess that each person who wants to help the pro-life cause by boycotting the pro-abort donors has to buy a copy, and then keep it to themselves. I guess it can be passed from hand to hand, but it can't be copied, or reproduced, and as such, it's worthless to the pro-life internet community. I won't name them, and I'd like to say that I'm doing them a favor by being silent. I believe that MRM received an email from someone connected to that site last summer, and if it was them, they were rude and arrogant because our list was out of date. God help them. Their greed is part of the reason!

     What we need is access to the list of people who have donated over the year to the abortion industry. I have no idea how to begin acquiring such a list, but I'm sure that one of you reading this does. There must be some sort of statement issued by Planned Parenthood and similar groups who are mostly donor-supported which names their benefactors. Perhaps it can be requested through the "freedom of information act?"

     If someone could either tell us how to go about getting such a list, or could acquire one for us, I promise you that I would post it on the internet for all to see - for free. Keeping it under wraps by charging for it and copyrighting it is the same as not telling people which foods set before them contain poison unless they pay for the information, and even then they're not allowed to effectively warn anyone else! What a sad ministry! Actually, it's *not* a ministry, apparently it's a business. They're milking the pro-life community for profit.

     Please help us to get the word out and keep our list up to date, for the sake of all the innocent babies that end up being slaughtered because of the financial help these conscienceless companies provide - and the life-saving help that other companies *refuse* to provide freely to the public.

In the Two Hearts,
Doris Ballard
admin@marysremnant.org