10-22-08: Pharmacies across country refusing to sell any contraceptives

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Unmoosical
*opinion*
How is this not forcing one's religious views on another. These people have the legal right to purchase these medications and are rejected because of the seller's religious views...

Forcing any religious or non religious view on another is wrong in my eyes.
*opinion*

Except this is not forcing anything on anyone. This is a business that doesn't sell a product that some people think they should carry. And judging by the poll, many here would extend their facist hand to slap these businesses who don't do what they think they should.

So you do not approve of the "fascism" of forcing them to sell, but you do approve of the "fascism" of them refusing to sell. Interesting.

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

uhhh... you seem to be confused.

Dave et al. are talking about FORCING a private business(via the gov't) to carry products they don't want to sell.

I am not at all confused. Either way is some group acting in a reactionary and/or dictatorial fashion.

Nope.

A business owner makes a decision on what products they carry. Dave et al. wants to force said business owner to sell certain things. yeah... they are so similar...:roll:

So only a government is capable of acting in a fascist manner, not an individual?
The business owner wants to deny these products in order to comply with their beliefs and force others to comply with their beliefs. Both fascist. Find another, more appropriate word

eh? Explain how it's facism for a business owner to decide what products they carry?

Fascism, as it appears you're trying to use it here, is oppressive, dictatorial control.
There you go, further explanation should not be necessary. That's why I'm telling you to find a more appropriate word.

Correct - that is how I'm using it since Dave et al. are calling for the gov't to FORCE them to sell something they currently do not. However, the owner has every right to sell or not sell any legal items. Their choice of products is not FORCING anyone on anything. If people want to buy something one store does not carry - they should find another who does carry it. It's not fascism to not carry a product.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

So only a government is capable of acting in a fascist manner, not an individual?
The business owner wants to deny these products in order to comply with their beliefs and force others to comply with their beliefs. Both fascist. Find another, more appropriate word

fascism was a system whereby the government and business owners acted in concert that grew out of the syndicalist movement in italy (rather than joining the labor unions together in syndicates the populace was joined through nationalism). fascist governments were very interventionalist in the economies. hitler's regime, despite being 'on the right' was very much involved in the operation of the industry of germany.

so, no, an individual cannot act in a fascist manner.

but, as wikipedia cites:

The word ?Fascism? is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else... almost any English person would accept ?bully? as a synonym for ?Fascist?. ? George Orwell, What is Fascism?. 1944.[44]

as a "hopelessly vague... pejorative epithet" you could claim that almost anything is fascist.

Originally posted by: Unmoosical
*opinion*
How is this not forcing one's religious views on another. These people have the legal right to purchase these medications and are rejected because of the seller's religious views...

Forcing any religious or non religious view on another is wrong in my eyes.
*opinion*

careful, if you step in a church you might hear some religious views, and they'd be forcing them upon you!

further, you'd force a non-religious view upon another, something your last sentence claims is 'wrong'

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Unmoosical
*opinion*
How is this not forcing one's religious views on another. These people have the legal right to purchase these medications and are rejected because of the seller's religious views...

Forcing any religious or non religious view on another is wrong in my eyes.
*opinion*

god (no pun intended), what are you people smoking? A pharmacy is a private business. they don't have to sell anything they don't want to sell. How is this pushing religion on anyone. You are NOT forced to purchase from them, or hell, even walk into the store.

 

[fstime]

We have a lot of morons here.

The pharmacy is a private business, they can sell what ever drugs they want.

If they don't sell the drugs you want, go to another pharmacy or open your own fucking pharmacy if you feel there is such a huge demand for whatever your missing out on. You will make a killing!

Free market motherfvckers, go to china if you want mommy and daddy to tell business owners when they're allowed to wipe their ass.

 

[DealMonkey]

You're an idiot if you believe that medication is the same as a ball-point pen. I'm sorry, but allowing medical professionals to pick and choose who they will serve or what medical attention they will offer up based on their personal religous beliefs, is a patently shitty idea.

The only reason, I repeat the ONLY reason, people are in here defending this is because their specific religious beliefs are in alignment. Meaning: evangelicals who ignorantly believe that contraceptives = abortion.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: bamacre
Dell refuses to sell me computers. Should I be able to sue them? Should they be forced to sell computers to me?

Is the computer a legally prescribed drug to you?

dave, why can't you seperate the legal prescription from the choice to sell? they are two different things. wake up, man. stop trying to take rights away from legal business owners.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Unmoosical
*opinion*
How is this not forcing one's religious views on another. These people have the legal right to purchase these medications and are rejected because of the seller's religious views...

Forcing any religious or non religious view on another is wrong in my eyes.
*opinion*

god (no pun intended), what are you people smoking? A pharmacy is a private business. they don't have to sell anything they don't want to sell. How is this pushing religion on anyone. You are NOT forced to purchase from them, or hell, even walk into the store.

They are a private business .... that operates with a license from the state they are in. If the state has laws preventing this, I see no reason that their license can't be pulled.

If Pharms wanted to be able to tell people what they should/shouldn't take, they should have become MDs instead. Leave the decisions up to those that are qualified and fill the damn prescriptions.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
-snip-
Yes, use the recently approved by the Supreme Court Private emminent Domain laws to declare the non-compliant "Paharmacy's" as blighted and give the property to those that would be in compliance and truly a Pharmacy.

Dave, this ^ surprises me. I didn't think you approved of our government excercising such heavy-handed powers against people.

IMO, because it's a private business they can sell what they want. I don't see how anyone is inconvenienced by this, no doubt there's a Walmart nearby. Walmart's have a pharmacy, and I bet they like the extra business from others' refusal to carry certain products.

People can also order them online.

I don't see the big deal.

People speaking about licenses are mis-informed (and likely unlicensed themselves). A licenses just means you are competent enough to do something; that's all. You can hold any number of licenses and then not even work in the profession.

Edit: Look at licenses this way: it means you are allowed to do something. It doesn't mean you have to do it.

Fern

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: PELarson

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

No, this is a state licensed Pharmacist making a medical decision which overrides a state licensed Physician which is not allowed except in cases of negligance by the Physician!

Nope, the pharmacy is not making a medical decision. This is a private business that doesn't sell what the customer wants to buy.

By refusing the prescription they are overriding the doctor.

No, they aren't. Nothing prevents a person from going to a different pharmacy, just like nothing prevents me from going to Wegman's because Stop and Shop doesn't carry Hot & Spicy Chex Mix.

To save some time -
Your response: Was the Chex Mix legally prescribed to you?
My response to that response: What difference does it make? A prescription gives you permission to buy the drug. I don't know where you're making the connection that all pharmacies must carry all prescription drugs.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
You're an idiot if you believe that medication is the same as a ball-point pen. I'm sorry, but allowing medical professionals to pick and choose who they will serve or what medical attention they will offer up based on their personal religous beliefs, is a patently shitty idea.

The only reason, I repeat the ONLY reason, people are in here defending this is because their specific religious beliefs are in alignment. Meaning: evangelicals who ignorantly believe that contraceptives = abortion.

so tell me what i am

Originally posted by: Pens1566

They are a private business .... that operates with a license from the state they are in. If the state has laws preventing this, I see no reason that their license can't be pulled.

If Pharms wanted to be able to tell people what they should/shouldn't take, they should have become MDs instead. Leave the decisions up to those that are qualified and fill the damn prescriptions.

as the article says, that state doesn't have a law preventing pharamcies from selling drugs they don't feel like selling

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: mxyzptlk

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: mxyzptlk

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Wait, who cares? Go to a different pharmacy.

Why are people trying to give money to businesses that dont want it?

That's easy when a different pharmacy is only 2-3 minutes away.. What about when its 45 minutes away, or 2 hours away, or the next state away? where would you draw the line that this is an unreasonable burden to be placed on someone with limited resources?

I'll ask you the same question I asked Dave.

Your solution is to close the pharmacy down and force the other 99% of patients to make that 45 minute hike?

No, my solution is for every pharmacist to carry everything, within reason. Like skoorb said, if that means making a special order to keep from having to stock costly items with low demand, that's okay with me.

Seems that makes me a Nazi, I guess..

Define "within reason". Be careful.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
You're an idiot if you believe that medication is the same as a ball-point pen. I'm sorry, but allowing medical professionals to pick and choose who they will serve or what medical attention they will offer up based on their personal religous beliefs, is a patently shitty idea.

The only reason, I repeat the ONLY reason, people are in here defending this is because their specific religious beliefs are in alignment. Meaning: evangelicals who ignorantly believe that contraceptives = abortion.

I am not religious, but I'll be damned if I have someone telling me (if I was a business owner) what products I must sell.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

the are licensed and regulated by the government, so no, they are not a private business.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Unmoosical
*opinion*
How is this not forcing one's religious views on another. These people have the legal right to purchase these medications and are rejected because of the seller's religious views...

Forcing any religious or non religious view on another is wrong in my eyes.
*opinion*

god (no pun intended), what are you people smoking? A pharmacy is a private business. they don't have to sell anything they don't want to sell. How is this pushing religion on anyone. You are NOT forced to purchase from them, or hell, even walk into the store.

They are a private business .... that operates with a license from the state they are in. If the state has laws preventing this, I see no reason that their license can't be pulled.

If Pharms wanted to be able to tell people what they should/shouldn't take, they should have become MDs instead. Leave the decisions up to those that are qualified and fill the damn prescriptions.

they are not telling anyone what they should or should not take. The prescription does not become void or invalid because the pharmacy doesn't carry it. Go to another pharmacy or, better yet, order it through the doc.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: PELarson

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

No, this is a state licensed Pharmacist making a medical decision which overrides a state licensed Physician which is not allowed except in cases of negligance by the Physician!

Nope, the pharmacy is not making a medical decision. This is a private business that doesn't sell what the customer wants to buy.

By refusing the prescription they are overriding the doctor.

:roll:


Why is this even an issue to get passionate about? Did you knock someone up because they couldnt get birth control?

i know you don't, but some people do have principles.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

the are licensed and regulated by the government, so no, they are not a private business.

almost all business need some amount of licensing: daycares, food outlets, accounting/legal offices, insurance agents, on and on and on. Are you telling me these aren't private business?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

We should be allowed to turn away blacks and homosexuals at the door too, my business, my rules.

Uhh we are talking about not carrying products here - not about refusing service to people. Nice try though... you libs can always find an angle to play the race/gay card can't you....

its the same argument

 

[theeedude]

They should fill these prescriptions or have their license revoked and make room for another pharmacy that will. Seems fairly straightforward that they are licensed by the state to perform a function, which they are not performing.

 

[bamacre]

I just added...
http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eB...edback2&userid=dmcowen
... to my blocked buyers list.

If he doesn't like it, he can call a lawyer.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

the are licensed and regulated by the government, so no, they are not a private business.

almost all business need some amount of licensing: daycares, food outlets, accounting/legal offices, insurance agents, on and on and on. Are you telling me these aren't private business?

to a degree, yes.


A pharmacist is a licensed professional, if they are morally unable to untake the demands of their profession, should have their license removed.

 

[theeedude]

Ambulance companies are also often private, by this logic, if their EMT's don't believe in blood transfusions, they should be allowed to just let you bleed to death after an accident.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
OMG!!! a private business refusing to sell certain things?


So dave(et al.) - should every pharmacy be force to carry and sell every drug/treatment?

the are licensed and regulated by the government, so no, they are not a private business.

almost all business need some amount of licensing: daycares, food outlets, accounting/legal offices, insurance agents, on and on and on. Are you telling me these aren't private business?

to a degree, yes.


A pharmacist is a licensed professional, if they are morally unable to untake the demands of their profession, should have their license removed.

Government enforcing morality? LOL

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Ambulance companies are also often private, by this logic, if their EMT's don't believe in blood transfusions, they should be allowed to just let you bleed to death after an accident.

Let's hypothetically say one of them did just that. And let's assume they faced no legal repercussions. What do you think would be the outcome of their actions?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

So only a government is capable of acting in a fascist manner, not an individual?
The business owner wants to deny these products in order to comply with their beliefs and force others to comply with their beliefs. Both fascist. Find another, more appropriate word

fascism was a system whereby the government and business owners acted in concert that grew out of the syndicalist movement in italy (rather than joining the labor unions together in syndicates the populace was joined through nationalism). fascist governments were very interventionalist in the economies. hitler's regime, despite being 'on the right' was very much involved in the operation of the industry of germany.

so, no, an individual cannot act in a fascist manner.

but, as wikipedia cites:

The word ?Fascism? is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else... almost any English person would accept ?bully? as a synonym for ?Fascist?. ? George Orwell, What is Fascism?. 1944.[44]

as a "hopelessly vague... pejorative epithet" you could claim that almost anything is fascist.

That's where I was headed, I was just taking the scenic route

I don't take anything in this place (P&N) too seriously because it's all so ridiculous

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: mxyzptlk

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Wait, who cares? Go to a different pharmacy.

Why are people trying to give money to businesses that dont want it?

That's easy when a different pharmacy is only 2-3 minutes away.. What about when its 45 minutes away, or 2 hours away, or the next state away? where would you draw the line that this is an unreasonable burden to be placed on someone with limited resources?

And THAT is the crux of the problem!

I am disgusted by this religious zealotry.