> I don't know any pro-life people who feel a burning need to cut these things. (SNAP, WIC)
I definitely am looking at it through the political/government lens. And while it's possible for someone to be pro-life and support progressive policies, I'm not sure who they would vote for that could represent them. There's a huge political fault line over many hot-button topics. People that are voting for pro-life conservative representation are usually the same representatives trying to reduce healthcare and are against social welfare programs. It could be said that many people were voting against their own healthcare interests, which we're soon to find out.
I'm all about people standing by their principals, and doing what they can, but I feel like this is government's problem, and charity while good isn't nearly enough to cover the scope of the issues, and certainly can't fix them at the source. I agree with your (2) as well. The 'charity' and price fixing of prescription drugs has been really interesting, because the drug companies quote the "reduced" price, but then if you hear the actual price charged to an insurance company, you'd faint. The "it might only cost you $10" on TV commercials is totally a way to play to people's ideas that prescriptions are affordable for everyone. It'd be much better for everyone to just have a reasonable price than try to be "charitable" (at least to some, and then rip off whoever has money).
We have to agree to disagree about planned parenthood though. Birth control, abortions, and other women's health care (that isn't related to pregnancy) is still important care, even if you disagree with them on religious terms. I wouldn't say that it's pro or con mother (and I don't think I ever did), but I would say it is pro-woman and definitely pro-choice.
I think the only place that would be against mothers is when you're going to a place and they try to convince you to do something you don't want to do, which I've heard happens at some of these centers.
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/15/support-shams-anti-abortion-...
You seem to be viewing all these problems through a political and government lens. I feel it's a leap in logic to say "if someone doesn't support progressive policies then they don't care about mothers, families, and born lives".
One example, there are too many to list exhaustively, is in the recent refugee crisis. An evangelical charity supported by lots of red-staters was in there doing what it could (1).
On a personal level, the churches I've been part of do attack poverty and justice issues on many fronts. There are women's shelters, several programs for the homeless, food banks, free health care clinics, job placement programs, financial education programs, sponsorship of impoverished third-world children, sponsorship of impoverished third-world villages, and so on. There is also a fund for helping church members (some of whom come from local shelters or are otherwise poor) pay bills as needed. And there are innumerable education, mentoring, and counseling programs offered to help families be emotionally and spiritually healthy, partly to avoid the need for programs for people with broken homes and so on.
I am not afraid that I don't care about mothers just because Planned Parenthood is not on the list. Modulo big mistakes in the implementation (1), I am fine with SNAP, WIC, etc. when they're used to help poor families. I don't know any pro-life people who feel a burning need to cut these things.
And, as a side note, it's really a bad idea to keep bringing up Planned Parenthood as being pro-mother. From time to time we have friends with money problems that need pregnancy care. We contacted the local Planned Parenthood asking about their offerings, only to find that they offer none, really. Not even referrals. They more or less said they do abortions and birth control and do not offer programs for women who are planning an actual pregnancy. A local pro-life pregnancy center also did not offer anything in house, but did refer us to some pro-life shelters and programs that would help out with prenatal care.
1) https://www.samaritanspurse.org/disaster/refugee-crisis-in-e...
2) I'd rather just move to minimum income, set it to a healthy level, and stop conflicting over funding levels of each of the multitude of entitlement programs. Poor people are hurt (or at least helped a lot less) by doing indirect charity through price fixing, corporate charity, etc. For example, do you know what might help with the homeless problem? Cheaper homes. But we insist on propping up housing prices, subsidizing sprawling McMansion-ridden suburbs, setting up people in unaffordable homes saying it's an investment, etc.