Four Walgreen pharmacists disciplined for not filling contraceptives

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

At least you have sense of sarcasm 🙂

It is the truth.. I will even back him up on it..

Liberals everywhere fight to destroy Christmas many times while giving aid to other religions.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

At least you have sense of sarcasm 🙂

It is the truth.. I will even back him up on it..

Liberals everywhere fight to destroy Christmas many times while giving aid to other religions.

I think the problem is that Christianity is gradually losing hold of the US that it gained during the cold war (fighting the godlesss commies) and you guys just can't deal with that. Stuff like separation of church of state, no school prayers, no 10 commandments on public buildings and such is really just removing these cold war reliqs to get back to a secular/non denominational republic that this country is designed to be. .

It might seem that these "liberals" are trying to rid Christianity all together, but in all reality you're just losing what you gained in the past 50 years.

Here's the english 😉 version what I've said before:


How would you feel if you came to the ER and a muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

Or how about that one muslim lady that wanted to wear burka for ther driverse license pic because it was dictated by her religion.

Or if you go to a restaurant on friday and they ask you if you're christian and you say yes and then refuse to sell you any food that contains meat because christians are supposed to fast every friday. ( My grandma did that)

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

At least you have sense of sarcasm 🙂

It is the truth.. I will even back him up on it..

Liberals everywhere fight to destroy Christmas many times while giving aid to other religions.

I think the problem is that Christianity is gradually losing hold of the US that it gained during the cold war (fighting the godlesss commies) and you guys just can't deal with that. Stuff like separation of church of state, no school prayers, no 10 commandments on public buildings ans duch is really just removing these cold war reliqs to get back to a secular/non denominational republic that this country is designed to be. .

It might seem that these "liberals" are trying to rid Christianity all together, but in all reality you're just losing what you gained in the past 50 years.

There is a lot of truth in your reply.. but I am not a Christian

Can you speak to the part about liberals helping out other religions while tearing down Christianity?

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: dahunan

There is a lot of truth in your reply.. but I am not a Christian

Can you speak to the part about liberals helping out other religions while tearing down Christianity?

How are 'liberals' helping other religions?

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

A scared woman does not NEED beef TODAY. A better example would be if beef was the only food this women could eat, and ALL of the supermarkets were owned bo indians who weren't interested in selling beef.

Free market doesn't apply to time-sensitive pharmaceutical products. In areas that are heavily stupid following your philosophy will result in complete lack of availability of contraceptives (which is I guess what you're waiting for). So once this woman is prescribed the morning-after pill, she's going to have no way to obtain it. Considering how short the time window is, she might no longer be able to get it in time. So now, who's responsible for a full-blown abortion?

Comparing food to time-sensitive contraceptives is insulting.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Meuge
A scared woman does not NEED beef TODAY. A better example would be if beef was the only food this women could eat, and ALL of the supermarkets were owned bo indians who weren't interested in selling beef.

Free market doesn't apply to time-sensitive pharmaceutical products. In areas that are heavily stupid following your philosophy will result in complete lack of availability of contraceptives (which is I guess what you're waiting for). So once this woman is prescribed the morning-after pill, she's going to have no way to obtain it. Considering how short the time window is, she might no longer be able to get it in time. So now, who's responsible for a full-blown abortion?

Comparing food to time-sensitive contraceptives is insulting.

So because of this "time-sensitive" nonsense, should a pharmacy be jailed for running out of any prescription?

Damn they better keep hefty inventories.

The funniest part is that if the pharmacist loses his license as you desire nobody's getting any medication! :laugh:

And where is this assumption that all pharmacies aren't interested in selling contraception? I'm sure some liberal pharmacies are even in Texas.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

At least you have sense of sarcasm 🙂

It is the truth.. I will even back him up on it..

Liberals everywhere fight to destroy Christmas many times while giving aid to other religions.

I think the problem is that Christianity is gradually losing hold of the US that it gained during the cold war (fighting the godlesss commies) and you guys just can't deal with that. Stuff like separation of church of state, no school prayers, no 10 commandments on public buildings ans duch is really just removing these cold war reliqs to get back to a secular/non denominational republic that this country is designed to be. .

It might seem that these "liberals" are trying to rid Christianity all together, but in all reality you're just losing what you gained in the past 50 years.

There is a lot of truth in your reply.. but I am not a Christian

Can you speak to the part about liberals helping out other religions while tearing down Christianity?

I think again this sort of perception again comes from what I've said before. There is a gradual progression from the "Nation of christian warriors" (who coined that phrease?) that started after ww2 to multiculturalism and representation of all faiths (and lack thereof).

Again I think the reality is quite different - it's just a shift in ballance of all the religions. I'm sure you can cite something like the removal of 10 commandments from a court house vs. Muslim prayer tower in Dearborn, which at first would seem that Islam somehow gets the favored of Christianty. I don't think that quite the case - if you flip the religions around, the outcome would still be different. Having citations from Koran on a courthouse wouldn't stick and I'm sure noone would care about church bells ringing after a sunday mass.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Meuge
A scared woman does not NEED beef TODAY. A better example would be if beef was the only food this women could eat, and ALL of the supermarkets were owned bo indians who weren't interested in selling beef.

Free market doesn't apply to time-sensitive pharmaceutical products. In areas that are heavily stupid following your philosophy will result in complete lack of availability of contraceptives (which is I guess what you're waiting for). So once this woman is prescribed the morning-after pill, she's going to have no way to obtain it. Considering how short the time window is, she might no longer be able to get it in time. So now, who's responsible for a full-blown abortion?

Comparing food to time-sensitive contraceptives is insulting.

So because of this "time-sensitive" nonsense, should a pharmacy be jailed for running out of any prescription?

Damn they better keep hefty inventories.

The funniest part is that if the pharmacist loses his license as you desire nobody's getting any medication! :laugh:

And where is this assumption that all pharmacies aren't interested in selling contraception? I'm sure some liberal pharmacies are even in Texas.

False analogy x2

It's really more analogous to you getting hurn in a car accident and getting rejected by the ER because of their faith versus them not having the best neurosurgen to patch your head up.

Also a crazy pharmacist getting canner will result in a replacement that is not crazy.

Zendri try asnwering the fundamental arguements rather than the gimmicks. Ignoring the ones that contradic you really just make you look like a troll...

 

[CaptnKirk]

May I suggest they seek employment as 'Bathroom Urinal Valets' or 'Peep-Show Mop-Boys'
which would be more to their liking.
Let them preach their agenda from there.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: halik

False analogy x2

It's really more analogous to you getting hurn in a car accident and getting rejected by the ER because of their faith versus them not having the best neurosurgen to patch your head up.

Also a crazy pharmacist getting canner will result in a replacement that is not crazy.

The end result is the same for car accident victim. Maybe we need laws saying the best neurosurgeons have to work 24/7.

If the pharmacy can find a replacement pharmacist maybe individuals should find a replacement pharmacy.

Healthcare is really overrun by bossy elitist liberal control freaks.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: halik
How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

That's not going to happen, at least in the U.S. It would be a gross violation of medical ethics, and, if anyone was injured because of such a refusal to provide critical care, the doctor and the ER would be open to massive liablility for malpractice.

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

First, that's not the same as a licensed medical professional refusing to provide critical, life saving services. Second, an employer would be justified in firing any employee who refused to perform any task specifically defined as part of their job. In such cases, employees can request specific exceptions, and employers can allow them, but servicing a meat counter is not the same as providing critical, life saving care.

Originally posted by: zendari
They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.
.
.
The end result is the same for car accident victim. Maybe we need laws saying the best neurosurgeons have to work 24/7.

If the pharmacy can find a replacement pharmacist maybe individuals should find a replacement pharmacy

zendari -- I think you have a good case against the doc who proved your failed brain transplant. :laugh:

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: halik

False analogy x2

It's really more analogous to you getting hurn in a car accident and getting rejected by the ER because of their faith versus them not having the best neurosurgen to patch your head up.

Also a crazy pharmacist getting canner will result in a replacement that is not crazy.

The end result is the same for car accident victim. Maybe we need laws saying the best neurosurgeons have to work 24/7.

Again way to troll around the argument that proves your wrong. The important part was the ER dock kicking you outta the hospital because you're an infidel to him, which is something a) goes aganst the Hippocratic oath b) is illeagal as hositals can't reject anyone

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: halik
How would you feel if you came to the ER and muslim doctor told you to go somewhere else because it's against his faith to heal infidels?

That's not going to happen, at least in the U.S. It would be a gross violation of medical ethics, and, if anyone was injured because of such a refusal to provide critical care, the doctor and the ER would be open to massive liablility for malpractice.

Or next time you're getting roast beef, the indian lady in the supermarket tells you to go to a different store, because she can't touch beef? (same thing for pork chops if the lady was muslim)

First, that's not the same as a licensed medical professional refusing to provide critical, life saving services. Second, an employer would be justified in firing any employee who refused to perform any task specifically defined as part of their job. In such cases, employees can request specific exceptions, and employers can allow them, but servicing a meat counter is not the same as providing critical, life saving care.

Originally posted by: zendari
They aren't christian so they aren't oppressed by libereals.

I think we need laws saying that all supermarkets must sell beef.

zendari -- I think you have a good case against the doc who proved your failed brain transplant. :laugh:

How is not giving out prescribed medications not a gross violation of Medical eithics? In either case the only deciding factor there is your faith and you're quite likly to affect the person future in a very fundamental way. Just wait 'till the first person that gets pregnant because the pharm didn't give out the pills sues the crap out of it. This debate will be done when they settle for a 6digit + sum.

As far as the beef thing goes, it only shows that you cannot be emplyed at a position where your faith prohibts you from actually doing what you're getting paid for. I mean think of a muslim at a pork slaughter house... should they be protected also?


To bring the arguemnt even closer to home:

How about a pharmacist that belongs to church of Scientology that refuses to release an inhaler to someone having an asthma attack because it is against their faith (I'm assuming scientologists are the ones that are against drugs). I'm sure that would be all fine and dandy untill that person dies in that particular CVS.

 

[miketheidiot]

if the pharmacists aren't capable of doing their job then they should be thrown to the curb. Isn't that a more typical zendari attitude?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: halik
How is not giving out prescribed medications not a gross violation of Medical eithics?

Stop! I think we're agreeing that neither pharmacists nor physicians should be allowed to withhold critical services as a basic part of their job descriptions. 😎 zendari's the one who wants to allow them to refuse such care. :roll:

 

[Questionmark]

I think both the government and the employees are wrong.

The employees (pharmacists) shouldnt work at a job that would compromise their religious beliefs. Its not the companies job to conform to the employees standards or morals, Just the opposite is true. If you dont like were you work, QUIT!!!

When does the government get the say-so on what products and drugs a privatly owned company has to stock their shelves? A little intrusive mabey? The government does have a responsiblity to regulate the quality of those drugs and to regulate who those drugs can be despensed to. Free trade? I think not.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Questionmark
When does the government get the say-so on what products and drugs a privatly owned company has to stock their shelves? A little intrusive mabey?

Hardly. The government represents the people's interests. Pharmacists are licensed and regulated because they are an essential part of the health care system, and they provide critical medications prescibed by physicans and essential to the life and health of our citizens.

Pharmacists are licensed because their job requires training and experience in handling such medications which could be dangerous if not handled correctly.

Pharmacists do NOT specify these medications. That is the responsibility of patients' physicians, and pharmacists have no business interfering with that relationship.

The pharmicist's job is strictly to ensure that each patient receives exactly what the physician prescribes, nothing more, and nothing less. Free trade has NOTHING to do with it.

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Questionmark
When does the government get the say-so on what products and drugs a privatly owned company has to stock their shelves? A little intrusive mabey?

Hardly. The government represents the people's interests. Pharmacists are licensed and regulated because they are an essential part of the health care system, and they provide critical medications prescibed by physicans and essential to the life and health of our citizens.

Pharmacists are licensed because their job requires training and experience in handling such medications which could be dangerous if not handled correctly.

Pharmacists do NOT specify these medications. That is the responsibility of patients' physicians, and pharmacists have no business interfering with that relationship.

The pharmicist's job is strictly to ensure that each patient receives exactly what the physician prescribes, nothing more, and nothing less. Free trade has NOTHING to do with it.

If the government was to take over the healthcare system for essential services since it most directly represents the interests of the people and is accountable to them would it solve problems such as this?

Very few government employees would dissent if it means a blackmark on their record or the loss of their job,benefits,retirement etc.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: HotChic

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: HotChic
Somebody just ought to open up a pharmacy that doesn't sell contraceptives, the dissenting pharmacists can go work there, and all the customers that feel like supporting that view can shop there. Walgreens can run their pharmacy and customers who want to shop there can go.

Is that a viable solution or is it too simplistic?

It's logical for us, but fundies don't want that (as they can't shove their beliefs down everyone else's throats)

Heh - who are you calling "us", buster? I'm a fundie. 🙂

Let the record show that I am terribly disappointed that catnap didn't respond to this at all. 🙂

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: halik
False analogy x2

It's really more analogous to you getting hurn in a car accident and getting rejected by the ER because of their faith

Oh, Zendari's analogy is terrific ( :roll: ):

If you die because the emergency room refuses to provide treatment (because you conflict with their faith), you won't go back to that emergency room the next time you die. The market at work.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: zendari
If the pharmacy can find a replacement pharmacist maybe individuals should find a replacement pharmacy.

Healthcare is really overrun by bossy elitist liberal control freaks.

This whole issue will get really complex when a case occurs involving a drug that has dual- or mutiple-use status (a drug used for more than one condition), one of which is morally repugnant to the pharmacist. I can imagine a situation where the pharmacist refuses to fill the prescription (because the pharmacist assumes it's for the morally offensive condition), when in fact the patient has some life-threatening ailment.

Of course, Zendari believes the pharmacist ought to be allowed to grill the patient to find out the condition for which the drug is being prescribed - not as a precaution against drug-interactions, mind you, but to determine if the patient's proposed usage is "moral."

It won't be "the free market" in cases like this. It will be huge lawsuits when the patient dies on the pharmacy floor arguing with the pharmacist to fill his prescription ("I'm not telling you why my physician precribed this drug for me, and I resent your question!") I assume you wouldn't advocate that the state impose strict limitations on lawsuits - that would be an example of elitist right-wing control freaks preventing people from seeking justice for injuries done to them.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: zendari
If the pharmacy can find a replacement pharmacist maybe individuals should find a replacement pharmacy.

Healthcare is really overrun by bossy elitist liberal control freaks.

This whole issue will get really complex when a case occurs involving a drug that has dual- or mutiple-use status (a drug used for more than one condition), one of which is morally repugnant to the pharmacist. I can imagine a situation where the pharmacist refuses to fill the prescription (because the pharmacist assumes it's for the morally offensive condition), when in fact the patient has some life-threatening ailment.

Of course, Zendari believes the pharmacist ought to be allowed to grill the patient to find out the condition for which the drug is being prescribed - not as a precaution against drug-interactions, mind you, but to determine if the patient's proposed usage is "moral."

It won't be "the free market" in cases like this. It will be huge lawsuits when the patient dies on the pharmacy floor arguing with the pharmacist to fill his prescription ("I'm not telling you why my physician precribed this drug for me, and I resent your question!") I assume you wouldn't advocate that the state impose strict limitations on lawsuits - that would be an example of elitist right-wing control freaks preventing people from seeking justice for injuries done to them.

We already have laws to protect the rights of our healthcare providers, though liberals are trying to override them and force doctors to provide abortions. The next step in liberal elitist coercion.

Text

Funny thing is, I've never heard of a patient dying in a pharmacy waiting for his pills or in the 20 minutes it takes to find another pharmacy.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: zendari
Funny thing is, I've never heard of a patient dying in a pharmacy waiting for his pills or in the 20 minutes it takes to find another pharmacy.

The heart attack will occur from the extreme agitation caused by the pharmacist chanting religious verses and inveighing against the sinful patient.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: zendari
Funny thing is, I've never heard of a patient dying in a pharmacy waiting for his pills or in the 20 minutes it takes to find another pharmacy.

The heart attack will occur from the extreme agitation caused by the pharmacist chanting religious verses and inveighing against the sinful patient.

Link to such story?