Pharmacists Can’t Say No to Contraception

[The ClayTaurus]

You don't seem to understand the concept of religious freedom. Telling a devout Catholic that he has to give people the morning after pill to anybody with a perscription, even if he has already given fair warning and has expressed his views, is like forcing a devout Muslim to eat a hot dog at the company picnic, or making a devout Christian take the Lord's name in vain as part of a company slogan. You can't just put relgion in a box. For anybody serious about religion, it isn't something to do on Sunday, it's a way of life.

Yes, but if someone was filling a position that required you have to work every Sunday morning, you can't apply and then say, by the way, I can't work Sunday's because I have church and still expect them to even consider you.

I don't think a pharmacist who isn't in private practice should have any discretion over what they prescribe. Should check-out clerks be able to refuse to sell you condoms at the grocery store? Your job is to sell shit, not judge what you deem personally worthy of selling.

 

[Mr. P]

You don't seem to understand the concept of religious freedom. ...

Religious freedom is great Hobbit, I support it 100%. Just keep it in church were it belongs. Using it to impose ones belief/s is counter productive. And it REALLY pisses people OFF.

 

[GotZoom]

Yes, but if someone was filling a position that required you have to work every Sunday morning, you can't apply and then say, by the way, I can't work Sunday's because I have church and still expect them to even consider you.

I don't think a pharmacist who isn't in private practice should have any discretion over what they prescribe. Should check-out clerks be able to refuse to sell you condoms at the grocery store? Your job is to sell shit, not judge what you deem personally worthy of selling.

Excellent point my fellow RX8'r.

Let's take the store clerk a step farther - he/she doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, or smoking. What about selling a magazine he/she feels is obscene?

Or....worse yet...the overweight person with two bags of doughnuts and 5 frozen pizzas. Should the clerk say he/she can't sell them because they aren't healthy?

 

[dilloduck]

Excellent point my fellow RX8'r.

Let's take the store clerk a step farther - he/she doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, or smoking. What about selling a magazine he/she feels is obscene?

Or....worse yet...the overweight person with two bags of doughnuts and 5 frozen pizzas. Should the clerk say he/she can't sell them because they aren't healthy?

An interesting clash between individual rights and living in a federal republic with a capitalist economy. If I own it, do I get to make all the regulations regarding it's operation irregardless of the United States Bill of Rights?

 

[Hobbit]

You make very good points, but I still feel that a pharmacist should not be required to fill perscriptions that they have religious problems with given that they have informed their employer ahead of time and the employer is capable of making accomidations. If the employer cannot run the pharmacy in such a way that they is always another pharmacist on duty with this guy, then he can simply inform him of this fact and they can both get on with their lives. If the guy doesn't mention anything about his objections ahead of time, however, then it's his own fault and he *should* get fired for not filling the perscription.

As an example of how this could work, let's look at my current job. I work at a grocery store deli. We have a lot of pork products in the deli, yet according to Islam, it is an abomination to even touch any part of a pig. Technically, you don't actually touch the pig due to gloves, but accidents do happen, and gloves aren't perfect. If we had a Muslim working in the deli, the boss would simply make sure that that person is never the only person working in the cold cut section of the deli. It's certainly feasible, and all it would mean is that the person would just get another worker to talk over whenever somebody wanted some ham or something. In smaller delis, however, they might not need or be able to afford having 2 or more people on at all times, meaning that all employees would have to, at some time or another, be alone in the deli. A Muslim simply couldn't work there, due to this restriction, and if the Muslim didn't explain this, got the job, then sent people away without their ham due to religious objections, he'd be fired.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

You make very good points, but I still feel that a pharmacist should not be required to fill perscriptions that they have religious problems with given that they have informed their employer ahead of time and the employer is capable of making accomidations. If the employer cannot run the pharmacy in such a way that they is always another pharmacist on duty with this guy, then he can simply inform him of this fact and they can both get on with their lives. If the guy doesn't mention anything about his objections ahead of time, however, then it's his own fault and he *should* get fired for not filling the perscription.

As an example of how this could work, let's look at my current job. I work at a grocery store deli. We have a lot of pork products in the deli, yet according to Islam, it is an abomination to even touch any part of a pig. Technically, you don't actually touch the pig due to gloves, but accidents do happen, and gloves aren't perfect. If we had a Muslim working in the deli, the boss would simply make sure that that person is never the only person working in the cold cut section of the deli. It's certainly feasible, and all it would mean is that the person would just get another worker to talk over whenever somebody wanted some ham or something. In smaller delis, however, they might not need or be able to afford having 2 or more people on at all times, meaning that all employees would have to, at some time or another, be alone in the deli. A Muslim simply couldn't work there, due to this restriction, and if the Muslim didn't explain this, got the job, then sent people away without their ham due to religious objections, he'd be fired.

Using your example, if your religion makes it problematic for you to handle certain kinds of meat, you shouldn't be working in a deli at all.

EDIT: Or, you should find a deli that is pork-free... or start your own.

 

[dilloduck]

Using your example, if your religion makes it problematic for you to handle certain kinds of meat, you shouldn't be working in a deli at all.

My point exactly---apparently capitalism takes precedence when there is a conflict with money and religion. Are the secularists right--should religion take a back seat so the economy can flourish without having to pay attention to the idiosyncrocies of religion? Should liquor stores be built next door to a church etc. ?

 

[Mr. P]

Excellent point my fellow RX8'r.

Let's take the store clerk a step farther - he/she doesn't believe in drinking alcohol, or smoking. What about selling a magazine he/she feels is obscene?

Or....worse yet...the overweight person with two bags of doughnuts and 5 frozen pizzas. Should the clerk say he/she can't sell them because they aren't healthy?

And that is exactly the point. We are all entitled to our views and beliefs, but NONE of us are entitled to force those views or beliefs on anyone else, period.

I hate to say it but that is exactly what some people try to do, even on this board.
The interesting thing to me is I don’t encounter this sort of stuff outside the web.

 

[Hobbit]

Using your example, if your religion makes it problematic for you to handle certain kinds of meat, you shouldn't be working in a deli at all.

Maybe not, and while I'd question this Muslim's choice of career, I wouldn't object to a few accomidations being made, just so long as it was all pre-arranged and they didn't put an undue burden on other employees. It's not uncommon in the Deli for someone to say "Could you get this?" for other reasons, and so long as I knew ahead of time why this was occuring, I wouldn't complain.

In the end, it's all up to the circumstances. You also need to see these pharmacists' point of view. They've spent years in school learning to be a pharmacist because they want to help save lives and it's a career they enjoy. Now, they're being told that if they want to work as a pharmacist, ever, then they (once again, from their point of view) have to given people poison with which to kill innocent babies every day. It's too late to choose a different career, and they would never be able to sleep at night knowing that they've facilitated a murder.

 

[dilloduck]

And that is exactly the point. We are all entitled to our views and beliefs, but NONE of us are entitled to force those views or beliefs on anyone else, period.

I hate to say it but that is exactly what some people try to do, even on this board.
The interesting thing to me is I don’t encounter this sort of stuff outside the web.

Is that a view or belief you have that you are "forcing " on the board or just one that you happen to be expressing with no particular motive ?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

My point exactly---apparently capitalism takes precedence when there is a conflict with money and religion. Are the secularists right--should religion take a back seat so the economy can flourish without having to pay attention to the idiosyncrocies of religion? Should liquor stores be built next door to a church etc. ?

Deli meats and contraceptive sales don't really impact the economy that much, methinks.

It's a slippery slope, if you have to be mindful of everyone's religious wishes, you wouldn't be able to run a business. As someone who is religious, I think the burden is on you, the individual, to select your profession so that it's not in conflict with your religion.

 

[Mr. P]

My point exactly---apparently capitalism takes precedence when there is a conflict with money and religion. ....

Blue Laws, anybody?

 

[Mr. P]

Is that a view or belief you have that you are "forcing " on the board or just one that you happen to be expressing with no particular motive ?

Nope it's fact.

 

[dilloduck]

Deli meats and contraceptive sales don't really impact the economy that much, methinks.

It's a slippery slope, if you have to be mindful of everyone's religious wishes, you wouldn't be able to run a business. As someone who is religious, I think the burden is on you, the individual, to select your profession so that it's not in conflict with your religion.

It's just one of those debate points that I find interesting but really don't have a solid answer to but I agree--If we were to be "tolerant" of all religious beliefs, our everyday lives would become quite complicated. In real public life in America it seems that religion must always submit to the economy. Money just rules.

 

[dilloduck]

Nope it's fact.

ahhhh you are different--you force "facts" on people. :teeth:

 

[dilloduck]

Blue Laws, anybody?

Slowly disappearing

 

[The ClayTaurus]

It's just one of those debate points that I find interesting but really don't have a solid answer to but I agree--If we were to be "tolerant" of all religious beliefs, our everyday lives would become quite complicated. In real public life in America it seems that religion must always submit to the economy. Money just rules.

Yup. Society is built on it. And if you want to have a functioning, healthy society which you can prosper and practice your religion in comfort, it's up to you, the individual, to make sure you make choices that conform to your religion to begin with, not try and conform your choices to your religion after the fact.

 

[Hobbit]

I'm just saying that there should be some give and take. Neither the employer or the employed should bear the full burden. If one side isn't able to bend enough to meet the other, then that's just an employment that doesn't happen. It's up to the employed to notify the employer of anything that might come up, at which point it's up to the employer to see if it's possible to meet the person's religious requirement without cutting into productivity. The employed might have to accept such things as reduced hours to accomidate the employer, but just like any contract, both sides show how far they're willing to go. If they're willing to go far enough, the person gets hired. If not, then he can seek employment elsewhere. Employers who don't bend at all to religion will have more trouble finding workers, but may very well get more productivity per worker. The one that bends will find work more easily, but may lose productivity. The most successful businesses will lie somewhere in between.

 

[dilloduck]

Yup. Society is built on it. And if you want to have a functioning, healthy society which you can prosper and practice your religion in comfort, it's up to you, the individual, to make sure you make choices that conform to your religion to begin with, not try and conform your choices to your religion after the fact.

Society my need it to survive but the intangible strengths of a country lies in its' character. A rich society without character is doomed by greed and selfishness. If I choose to follow a religion which renounces material wealth in favor of spirituality then I will have less rights in a society such as ours.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Society my need it to survive but the intangible strengths of a country lies in its' character. A rich society without character is doomed by greed and selfishness. If I choose to follow a religion which renounces material wealth in favor of spirituality then I will have less rights in a society such as ours.

Yes, that's very true. But, in order to change that you would have to change human nature, which isn't happening (realistically). So, the only reasonable solution appears to be finding a way to be religious and exude character within the pros and cons of the nature of humans.