pharmacist have 1st Amendment right to refuse to dispense Plan B

[Quantum Windbag]

Plan B was released to the public in 1999. i think 13 years is more than enough time to make a career change.

and again, how is a fire arms dealers not assisting in murder? (im not agreeing that he actually is, but by this line of reasoning it is entirely possible)

what if a pharmacist refused to fill a prescription for the Pill? or (if they had control over them) they refused to distribute condoms? is that acceptable? this argument applies no just for a contraceptive but for any drug. pain killers, cancer drugs, steroids. etc etc etc

What if the government decided to make you change your career after 40 years?

the government didnt force anything. they didnt force the pharmacist to carry the product. Plan B is also not manufactured by the government. if the pharmacist disagreed with a product that was being sold and he/she was expected to sell as part of their regular job duties, they they should have made that issue know in 1999 when it was released. not 13 years later. if they had brought up that issue at the time, the employer could have come up with a solution, whether it is removing that employee or developing an alternative plan such as having 2 pharmacists on duty at all times.

Excuse me? Have you been reading the ******* thread? This while thing came up because the State of Washington requires pharmacies to dispense Plan B on demand.

 

[Syphon]

apparently yes, and a conservative appellate court agreed:
Plan B Pill | Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says - Los Angeles Times

Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The three 9th Circuit judges found common ground despite differing outlooks:
Two conservatives named to the court by President George W. Bush and a liberal named by President Clinton made up the panel.

 

[Syphon]

What if the government decided to make you change your career after 40 years?

the government didnt force anything. they didnt force the pharmacist to carry the product. Plan B is also not manufactured by the government. if the pharmacist disagreed with a product that was being sold and he/she was expected to sell as part of their regular job duties, they they should have made that issue know in 1999 when it was released. not 13 years later. if they had brought up that issue at the time, the employer could have come up with a solution, whether it is removing that employee or developing an alternative plan such as having 2 pharmacists on duty at all times.

Excuse me? Have you been reading the ******* thread? This while thing came up because the State of Washington requires pharmacies to dispense Plan B on demand.

i was referring to the fed. not the state. sorry for not clarifying.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

they have had 13 years to either adjust their views or change professions. why has it taken them so long to object? Plan B was released in 1999.

It didn't. No one actually required them to sell it until recently, but thanks for proving you are an idiot.

what part of the health care law requires all pharmacies to stock and supply Plan B?

FYI this is a state law, not a federal law.

Judge says Wash. can?t make pharmacies sell Plan B - Boston.com
Plan B Pill | Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says - Los Angeles Times

"The three 9th Circuit judges found common ground despite differing outlooks: Two conservatives named to the court by President George W. Bush and a liberal named by President Clinton made up the panel."

Gee, idiot, I never said it was a federal law. Unlike Mike I don't think states have the power to force people to do things they disagree with anymore than the federal government does.

Want to try again?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

apparently yes, and a conservative appellate court agreed:
Plan B Pill | Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says - Los Angeles Times

Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The three 9th Circuit judges found common ground despite differing outlooks:
Two conservatives named to the court by President George W. Bush and a liberal named by President Clinton made up the panel.

You apparently did not read my posts. The same judge that made this ruling also ruled that the Air Force had to keep a reservists who was discharged under DADT. Nice of you to try to blame this in partisan politics.

 

[Syphon]

so, if you disagree with womens right, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by those laws? if you disagree with civil rights, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by them?

what about militias or extreme groups such as the KKK. should a member of the KKK who keeps slaves be forced to free them? should a member of a radical church such as the warren jeff's sect be forced to abide by child rape laws? your argument is full of holes.

 

[Syphon]

apparently yes, and a conservative appellate court agreed:
Plan B Pill | Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says - Los Angeles Times

Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The three 9th Circuit judges found common ground despite differing outlooks:
Two conservatives named to the court by President George W. Bush and a liberal named by President Clinton made up the panel.

You apparently did not read my posts. The same judge that made this ruling also ruled that the Air Force had to keep a reservists who was discharged under DADT. Nice of you to try to blame this in partisan politics.

what wrong with forcing the air force to keep a reservist released under what is now no longer law?

and there were 3 judges on here, 2 GWB appointees and self proclaimed conservatives and one "liberal" Clinton appointee. damn that majority conservative panel!

 

[Immanuel]

how is a pharmacist asked to kill someone? thats like saying the guy selling guns down the street is asked to kill someone by allowing his customers to purchase guns. if you made that argument, then the guns dont kill people, people kill people argument is invalidated immediately.

A person who has a problem with the fact a gun he/she sold to someone else might end up killing someone later, would never become a firearms dealer. It isn't like guns killing people is anything new.

Pharmacists are not being asked to kill someone. They are being forced to assist in the killing of someone. And, this is new to the profession.

Immie

Plan B was released to the public in 1999. i think 13 years is more than enough time to make a career change.

and again, how is a fire arms dealers not assisting in murder? (im not agreeing that he actually is, but by this line of reasoning it is entirely possible)

what if a pharmacist refused to fill a prescription for the Pill? or (if they had control over them) they refused to distribute condoms? is that acceptable? this argument applies no just for a contraceptive but for any drug. pain killers, cancer drugs, steroids. etc etc etc

1) Plan B may have been released 13 years ago. How long have pharmacists been forced to dispense it against their will?

2) Again, anyone who had a problem with selling guns would not go into that line of work.

3) As far as I am concerned if a pharmacist had a problem selling baby aspirin then they should not be forced to do so. A pharmacy is a private business and has the right to make the decisions as to what products they will sell or not sell. And as stated earlier if the pharmacist is an employee of a pharmacy, the decision as to whether or not he will remain an employee is up to his employer not the state.

Immie

 

[Syphon]

the state of washington law passed in 2007, so its been 5 years.

and anyone selling prescription drugs, should no go into that line of work. same argument.....

 

[saveliberty]

why would a person knowing go into a business that violates their beliefs in the first place? do you think someone who is pro life would go into the abortion business just to refuse to perform abortion?

Why would a pharmacist ever think they would be asked to kill someone as a part of their job in an industry that pledges no harm?

how is a pharmacist asked to kill someone? thats like saying the guy selling guns down the street is asked to kill someone by allowing his customers to purchase guns. if you made that argument, then the guns dont kill people, people kill people argument is invalidated immediately.

Your lack of understanding the thread OP is not my problem. Educate your ass and then contribute okay?

 

[Syphon]

Why would a pharmacist ever think they would be asked to kill someone as a part of their job in an industry that pledges no harm?

how is a pharmacist asked to kill someone? thats like saying the guy selling guns down the street is asked to kill someone by allowing his customers to purchase guns. if you made that argument, then the guns dont kill people, people kill people argument is invalidated immediately.

Your lack of understanding the thread OP is not my problem. Educate your ass and then contribute okay?

you lack of understanding of the legal system is clouded by religious beliefs. educate yourself and you wont sound so ignorant.

 

[saveliberty]

why would a person knowing go into a business that violates their beliefs in the first place? do you think someone who is pro life would go into the abortion business just to refuse to perform abortion?

Why would a pharmacist ever think they would be asked to kill someone as a part of their job in an industry that pledges no harm?

This law is recent and affects many pharmacists who have made the profession their life's work. Fifty years from now, when we have a whole new generation of pharmacists entering the field maybe they should not be afforded the excuse that they never expected to have to participate in the taking of a life.

Immie

So the state will drop the hippocratic oath in receiving a degree or license in medicine?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so, if you disagree with womens right, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by those laws? if you disagree with civil rights, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by them?

what about militias or extreme groups such as the KKK. should a member of the KKK who keeps slaves be forced to free them? should a member of a radical church such as the warren jeff's sect be forced to abide by child rape laws? your argument is full of holes.

A sure sign that someone is defending a loosing position is when they get really absurd in efforts to defend it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

apparently yes, and a conservative appellate court agreed:
Plan B Pill | Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says - Los Angeles Times

Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The three 9th Circuit judges found common ground despite differing outlooks:
Two conservatives named to the court by President George W. Bush and a liberal named by President Clinton made up the panel.

You apparently did not read my posts. The same judge that made this ruling also ruled that the Air Force had to keep a reservists who was discharged under DADT. Nice of you to try to blame this in partisan politics.

what wrong with forcing the air force to keep a reservist released under what is now no longer law?

and there were 3 judges on here, 2 GWB appointees and self proclaimed conservatives and one "liberal" Clinton appointee. damn that majority conservative panel!

Stupidity on top of Stupidity.

He ordered it back when DADT was still the law, but I do thank you for going out of your way to prove you should have done some homework when you were in school.

 

[saveliberty]

why would a person knowing go into a business that violates their beliefs in the first place? do you think someone who is pro life would go into the abortion business just to refuse to perform abortion?

Because the person we are actually discussing here has been a pharmacist for 40 years and these problems did not exist back when they decided to become a pharmacist? Or is that concept to complicated for you to track?

they have had 13 years to either adjust their views or change professions. why has it taken them so long to object? Plan B was released in 1999.

You're funny, there is a huge shortage of pharmacists. Go ahead, see how easy it is to get medicine without the ones we have. It took that long, because the state wasn't dumbass enough to challenge their religious beliefs until now.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

the state of washington law passed in 2007, so its been 5 years.

and anyone selling prescription drugs, should no go into that line of work. same argument.....

It has been 5 years, and she objected right away. For some obscure reason it took the case about 5 years to go through the pre trial motions, trial, appeal in state courts, all before finally getting to federal district court. I can't imagine why, but I am sure someone will be able to figure it out.

 

[saveliberty]

so, if you disagree with womens right, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by those laws? if you disagree with civil rights, then you shouldnt be forced to abide by them?

what about militias or extreme groups such as the KKK. should a member of the KKK who keeps slaves be forced to free them? should a member of a radical church such as the warren jeff's sect be forced to abide by child rape laws? your argument is full of holes.

When you're done ranting about stuff unrelated to the topic, feel free to rejoin the discussion.

 

[Syphon]

You apparently did not read my posts. The same judge that made this ruling also ruled that the Air Force had to keep a reservists who was discharged under DADT. Nice of you to try to blame this in partisan politics.

what wrong with forcing the air force to keep a reservist released under what is now no longer law?

and there were 3 judges on here, 2 GWB appointees and self proclaimed conservatives and one "liberal" Clinton appointee. damn that majority conservative panel!

Stupidity on top of Stupidity.

He ordered it back when DADT was still the law, but I do thank you for going out of your way to prove you should have done some homework when you were in school.

glad to see you skipped over the whole "conservative panel" part, because it didnt support your argument.

and the judge who ordered the airforce to keep the reservist found DADT to be discriminatory. that ole pesky discrimination thing. which is well within he right to do as a judge. just because you disagree with it doesnt make it ill. if you could get this idea through you thick skull, maybe you could have a civil debate. but calling people and names and getting angry simply shows your lack of tolerance and ignorance on more than one level.

 

[Syphon]

Because the person we are actually discussing here has been a pharmacist for 40 years and these problems did not exist back when they decided to become a pharmacist? Or is that concept to complicated for you to track?

they have had 13 years to either adjust their views or change professions. why has it taken them so long to object? Plan B was released in 1999.

You're funny, there is a huge shortage of pharmacists. Go ahead, see how easy it is to get medicine without the ones we have. It took that long, because the state wasn't dumbass enough to challenge their religious beliefs until now.

so because there is a huge shortage of teachers we shouldnt fire any teachers who dont follow the law either? there is also a huge shortage of nurses, should we fire all the nurses who dont follow the law either?

 

[saveliberty]

the state of washington law passed in 2007, so its been 5 years.

and anyone selling prescription drugs, should no go into that line of work. same argument.....

What is interesting here is that a pharmacist can refuse to dispense ANY drug to a patient, because it my cause harm to the person. This is the only drug (posion) I'm aware of that you HAVE to give to a patient.