Note: I'm not commenting on the issue per se, but find the reporting worth calling into question. Two thoughts: 1) When it comes to political ddmonations, Big

Note: I'm not commenting on the issue per se, but find the reporting worth calling into question. Two thoughts: 1) When it comes to political ddmonations, Big Inc tends to play both sides of the aisle. In a world rooted in journalism this possibility would have been thoroughly explored. That is, have these companies done similar on the pro-abortion side? Not saying assumes no, but we shouldn't have to assume. 2) On a more editorial note, the headline's language is unnecessarily lazy and "inflammatory". Anti-abortion lawmakers? When did anti-abortion become an adjective? It would be more journalistic to say "lawmakers who are anti-abortion".