Don't let anyone tell you the "slippery slope" argument is invalid. Especially when you are arguing that vice leads to more vice, or moral corruption leads to more moral corruption, the argument that, "It can only get worse," is not only valid, it is historically verifiable.
The latest case is of a Planned Parenthood representative before the Florida Legislature arguing for the right for them to perform "post birth abortions." The hearing was about determining laws and regulations overseeing a situation in which a child is born alive when the mother intended to abort. It happens more often than the pro-choice lobby would admit, so it is reasonable to figure out what is legally allowable in those situations.
But Planned Parenthood is now openly arguing for the right to kill a living baby out of the womb in a Doctor's office.
There are dozens of things wrong with this, but to begin with notice that the belief that abortion is an unlimited right (the position of Planned Parenthood) leads, naturally and logically, to infanticide. There is no biological or ontological difference between a baby in the womb or outside of it. So, if an institution's position is that the baby can be killed in the womb, there is no logical roadblock to the belief that it can be killed outside of the womb.
The rejoinder that the child was "intended to be aborted" is of no use here. To begin with, intending murder does not morally allow us to finish the job if it is botched. Secondly, what about a mother who comes in late in pregnancy, actually gives birth before the procedure (or gives birth before entering the abortion clinic), and then desires to have a "post-birth abortion"? There is no difference, and both are morally heinous.
What can be done? Beyond whatever political involvement people can have, support and pray for organizations doing great good like Life Network.