New bills being introduced about birth control

[madame_zora]

Well, in an effort to send us further back into the dark ages, new bills are being introduced to give pharmacists the right NOT to fill prescriptions for birth control options if they have a MORAL or RELIGOUS objection to it. I am shocked, have we learned nothing as a society?

I just heard this on the news this morning and I couldn't believe my ears, so I looked it up online and damned if it's not true. I thought only the insane objected to birth control, that's prevention! I'm left assuming that the religous right wants to breed more like-minded automatons for the purpose of world domination, I am really coming to hate this place.

Excuse me now, I'm going to pick out a frilly dress and fix my man some dinner. Don't worry, I'm barefoot.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/14/prescription.bill/

 

[jeepwranglerboi]

I know, I was outraged when I heard this a couple days ago. It's the pharmacists job to fill the prescription whether or not they are morally against it. What's nest? denying HIV/AIDS meds, cancer meds, allergy meds? I mean come on! This is so absolutely ridiculous. Give the woman her freakin pills and shut up about it. It is not the pharmacists place to judge. :grr:

 

[Altairion]

This is going way too far now. If you work in a pharmacy, you know you could be filling prescriptions for a variety of purposes. You know this going into your job, so the fact that birth control pills just might happen to show up should be an accepted fact. The job should not bend for the employee in this case; it's all up to the employee to suck it up and do what they were hired to do.

 

[blackwood]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Apr 15 2005, 04:58 PM
Well, in an effort to send us further back into the dark ages, new bills are being introduced to give pharmacists the right NOT to fill prescriptions for birth control options if they have a MORAL or RELIGOUS objection to it. I am shocked, have we learned nothing as a society?

I just heard this on the news this morning and I couldn't believe my ears, so I looked it up online and damned if it's not true. I thought only the insane objected to birth control, that's prevention! I'm left assuming that the religous right wants to breed more like-minded automatons for the purpose of world domination, I am really coming to hate this place.

Excuse me now, I'm going to pick out a frilly dress and fix my man some dinner. Don't worry, I'm barefoot.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/14/prescription.bill/

[post=300834]Quoted post[/post]​

madame_zora

Evangelical(sp) Conservatives and their spiritual leader G. Bush are doing their best to return us to the days of the Salem Witch trials. He has removed the "united" from the States of America. He/they embarass us before the world. For the next 3.5 years, don't be surprised by anything, except maybe our survival.
and...........Remember 51% of the citizens voted for him.

blackwood

 

[Sabln7]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Apr 15 2005, 04:58 PM
Well, in an effort to send us further back into the dark ages, new bills are being introduced to give pharmacists the right NOT to fill prescriptions for birth control options if they have a MORAL or RELIGOUS objection to it. I am shocked, have we learned nothing as a society?

I just heard this on the news this morning and I couldn't believe my ears, so I looked it up online and damned if it's not true. I thought only the insane objected to birth control, that's prevention! I'm left assuming that the religous right wants to breed more like-minded automatons for the purpose of world domination, I am really coming to hate this place.

Excuse me now, I'm going to pick out a frilly dress and fix my man some dinner. Don't worry, I'm barefoot.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/14/prescription.bill/

[post=300834]Quoted post[/post]​

I know you are barefoot, but are you pregnant? That's how GW would like you--barefoot, pregnant and with no opinions. Things have to change in 2006, or our way of life is doomed.

 

[MisterMark]

Interesting. In California, there's a bill moving through the legislature that would REQUIRE pharmacists to fill prescriptions, no matter what their personal beliefs are.

This state becomes less and less like the rest of the U.S. every day, and for the most part, I love it.

 

[Pecker]

Some merchants don't sell beer or cigarettes and some are closed on Sundays.

It's their business to run as they see fit.

If I were a business owner who was told he had to sell something against his will I'd be sure that I set the prices so high that my inventory would gather dust.

Please don't tell a man that he must sell you something when it would be a simple matter for you to go down the street to buy it.

 

[madame_zora]

@Blackwood, fortunately only about 50% of Americans voted, so that's only 25% of the population, but it's probably fair to say that the non-voters were split as well, although probably a lot more Dems than Reps didn't vote because of apathy.

@Mark, I'm surprised that California is going that route with Ah-nold around, but I sure am glad to hear it.

@Sabln7, I feel pregnant! We women are being so filled with bullshit I find it hard to fathom. Unfortunately, I won't be giving birth to this "load" for a long time.

@Pecker, there are all sorts of laws governing what a merchat may and may not sell, he is not free to do whatever he wishes, there are laws to protect the public in place in many ways (such as hours during which alcohol may be sold), so if one opens a pharmacy, I think it's fair to expect the prescription a doctor writes should not be overridden by a merchant or pharmacist, that's ludicrous. Should they then be able to decide in areas that affect you? What if they objected to YOUR prescription, should you have to jump from pharmacy to pharmacy and go through the embarassment of facing each new one not knowing what their personal beliefs are? That's bullshit, pure and simple.


We are heading to a place where the only freedom that exists is for the straight white male, and I find it disgusting. Fortunately the world is laughing AT us not WITH us, we deserve it!

 

[Pecker]

If a pharmacist chooses not to fill a certain prescription all he has to do is to inform the customer that he does not stock that medication.

It's up to the customer whether he will take all of his business to another drug store. It is not unusual for folks with a tight budget to split their business among several pharmacies due to pricing, so why not because of availability?

 

[Lex]

Here's my take--

This prescription resistance has been happening for several months now. There wouldn't need to be a law if people would just fill the precriptions and be quiet.

Birth Control pills are a controlled substance--Doctors decide who gets them ,not pharmacists. Anyone's precription should be filled, regardless of how an individual pharmacist feels about it. I'm sorry, but if you choose to be a pharmacist--you choose to fill people's prescriptions at their dpoctors' request. End of story. If you don't want to fill all prescriptions, I think you should find another living.

What's next? Do Catholic pharmacists/cashiers refuse to ring up condoms? Do anti-drug advocates refuse to fill medicinal marajuana scripts for cancer patients becasue they think drug use is amoral?

I view being a pharmacist akin to being a doctor or a public defender. Doctors can't choose which patients who want treatment and defense attorneys can't choose which criminals to defend.

If I have a precription and I bring it to your pharmacy, I want you to fill it and furthermore, I don't want your 2 cents when I pay for it.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Great. Just what we need. Another morals controversy to further divide this society.

SG

 

[madame_zora]

The real tragedy is for people in rural areas where this is actually more likely to happen, they may not have as many choices as to where they shop. I agree Lex, this gives a pharmacist veto rights over a doctor, as well as puts him in a position of moral judge. Judegment is in the hands of God alone, not some dude in a white coat. If we give any weiner in a minor position of auhority the right to express their religous views on their job, we're in for serious trouble. Jehovah's wintesses don't believe in medical treatment at all, so should they be able to refuse all sales of medication? Or is it just Christian beliefs that should be enforced? What if a Muslim pharmacist has a different objection? Fuck that.
I'm free to be a Muslim, if I feel that's right, but if I work in a busy restaurant, my employer is not obligated to give me time off for my five daily prayer times if they don't fit the job requirements. If I take a job, I must be able to perform it. If my own moral or religous view prevent me from doing a job, then I have to find a different one. End of story.

If we start legislating religion into the workplace, EVERYONE'S religion counts. It would be mass hysteria. No, this is just more right-wing psycho-Christian bullshit. This is the Conservatives taking advantage of their position of total governmental control to pass laws with long term effects while they have so much opportunity. This is exactly what I said would happen after the last election- they're going to stick it to us every way possible, just because they can. These laws are going up to be voted on ONLY by the majority Republican ruled house, not "we the people". This is the minority making laws for everybody. This is not Democracy.

Follow this out to the logical conclusion- if women aren't supposed to take birth control, aren't allowed to have abortions, then appaerntly we're only supposed to have sex for the purpose of breeding. That means all gay sex of either gender is wrong, all porn should be illegal, because arousal is wrong, unless you're planning to breed, and this site shouldn'y even be allowed to exist because it doesn't advocate sex for breeding purposes only. Is that really what we want? Are we really willing to forfeit our rights without a fight? Even you, Pecker, you can't think this is okay, do you? It's a lot more than a person following their conscience for themselves, they're being allowed to determine what someone else's conscience should be saying.

If someone doesn't believe in birth control, they have a right not to use it. They have a right to teach their children what they think is right, they have a right to run their own lives as they see fit, but NOT MINE! This kind of intrusion has got to stop! Conservatives are supposed to stand for less governmental intrusion into personal lives, what has happened?

 

[Dr Rock]

Originally posted by Pecker@Apr 15 2005, 10:25 PM
It is not unusual for folks with a tight budget to split their business among several pharmacies due to pricing, so why not because of availability?

[post=300915]Quoted post[/post]​

because it's more bullshit nobody needs to deal with. I agree that an ordinary retailer or wholesaler should retain the authority to decide what he will or won't stock, and I don't think anyone would argue with that. HOWEVER, when you're talking about prescriptions written by GPs, it does shade things a bit differently - call me old-fashioned but I'm inclined to think that a pharmacist has an obligation to their profession and to the medical community there, even if they feel none whatsoever to their customers. Lex is correct there - if they want to proselytize then they should close their pharmacy and open a bible / quran store or whatever the fuck.

 

[SomeGuyOverThere]

I saw a TV progam a while ago, where this totally gothic guy in black lethers, was being interviewed about the school shootings in some place, Im afraid I forget where, but it was one of the worst ones.

He was saying that at the rate the USA is going, it will soon plunge itself into civil war, just because of how different the feelings in different states are, that the government can't possibly hold it together forever, at some point, it wll fall to pieces and a civil war wil lstart.


Personally, Im realy looking forward to the liberals breaking away from George "The Bible is the inerrant word of God" Bush, and hte IMHO religious nutcases that follow him, trapped in their own little worlds of ignorance, obsessed with taking the timeline back by about 1000 years and making everyone "GOd Fearing" again.

*sigh*

 

[jonb]

Shit! Some women need the pill for hormonal reasons!

 

[SpeedoGuy]

This is an interesting topic and I've been thinking about it some more.

Its true that business owners don't have carte blanche to run their businesses any way they might wish to. A business owner can't simply choose on a whim to refuse service to some customers because of their race, religion, nationality, etc. Some forms of discrimination are illegal.

On the other hand, Pecker is right that no business should be forced to sell items they don't wish to stock. Case in point: Should every sporting good store be forced to sell handguns? Should every auto parts store be forced to supply foreign car parts? Should every trained surgeon be required to perform abortions? I think not.

In the end, I think I would come down on Pecker's side on this.

That said, I think there is more than simply moral objection at work here. Rather, there is something nastier that is leading to this pharmaceutical legislative trend in many states. I perceive this as one side's way of tweaking the nose of the other side. Its a vindictive poke in the eye, so to speak, to those with differing political and moral views.

SG

 

[Leung]

Originally posted by jonb@Apr 16 2005, 12:49 AM
Shit! Some women need the pill for hormonal reasons!

[post=300935]Quoted post[/post]​

This is true, I also know someone who is one the pill because she has bad skin. What if the pharmacist thinks it is the sign of the devil? Landagoshin! Break out the Holy Water!

 

[Dr Rock]

Originally posted by SomeGuyOverThere@Apr 15 2005, 11:18 PM
He was saying that at the rate the USA is going, it will soon plunge itself into civil war, just because of how different the feelings in different states are, that the government can't possibly hold it together forever, at some point, it wll fall to pieces and a civil war wil lstart.

[post=300930]Quoted post[/post]​

well at least then the "unemployables" like me will have OUR chance to make some fucking money for a change.

 

[steve319]

This is about RU-486, right?

I mean, I live in the heart of the conservative/Bible Belt part of the country (and sometimes I think it’s taking years off my life), and even folks around here think it’s kind of nutty to look at "traditional" birth control in this manner.

This can’t be just about standard before-the-fact birth control pills. Attitudes toward "the morning after pill," however, are verging on violent in this neck of the woods. Pharmacists around here would leap at this chance.

Just when I think that the pendulum has swung as far right as it can, something new like this just blows me away.

On the one hand, I can see the idea of a private business being forced to carry and sell a certain product as being unfair. On the other, though, I think that pharmaceuticals might just warrant being an exception to the rule. Pharmacies have to be licensed and approved, right? There’s a degree of governmental approval required to sell these products in the first place, and I think that should probably be used as the means through which these businesses should be required to stock and sell these products. Health care is a high-stakes component of our society, and I’m not sure that we should allow our personal beliefs to get in the way of a person’s private medical treatment.

I mean, if I were a Muslim postal service employee, I couldn’t just refuse to sort and carry Christmas cards just because I didn’t observe the holiday, right? It’s ludicrous! Could teachers begin refusing to teach students whose beliefs don’t match their own?

Yeah, I see the distinction between working for a large chain of pharmacies and owning your own small business pharmacy, but health care is crucial stuff, you know? You made a good point, Jana, when you mentioned that, in rural areas (where this is more likely to occur), there might just be no other local pharmacies to fill the prescription.

Birth Control pills are a controlled substance--Doctors decide who gets them, not pharmacists.

Well said, I think, Lex.

As I understand it, the official stance of the Catholic Church is just what you mentioned, Jana: that sex should only be for the purpose of procreation. Not to tell them how they should feel or what they should believe (by any means&#33, but it’s interesting to note that I don’t see the church rushing to condemn married couples who continue to have sex after they have been diagnosed as sterile—or after menopause, for that matter. Any catholic members of LPSG who can help us understand the church’s view better?

Just to play devil’s advocate for a moment: Maybe such views on birth control are as much a social policy creation as a moral one. How better to “go forth and multiply” (and ensure a steady stream of new parishioners and $&#036 than to disallow contraceptive practices? Just as marriage might have been (should still be?) a social imperative to make sure men stick around to financially look out for the mom and kids...

(now discuss! )

 

[KinkGuy]

Pharmacists are business people, yes. But they are part of what is left of our health care system. They are "providers." They are trained and licensed and theoretically have a creed similar to a physicians to provide care, consultation and privacy. Where do we draw the line? Heart medication because the pharmacist thinks you should die because you didn't take care of yourself? Antibiotics because catching that infection is Gods will? HIV medications because the only people who catch HIV deserve it? Condoms because you shouldn't be fucking anyway? None of this seems too far fetched. Just where do we draw the line.

Welcome to 1930.