My friends at Planned Parenthood emailed me today about the growing trend of pharmacists (this time, specifically at Target) refusing to fill prescriptions based on their moral beliefs. Now, we ALL know that “moral beliefs” translates to “religious beliefs”. I just wish PP would say it!What we have is a group of people who in reality provide a necessary public service refusing to do so under some circumstances. They want a say on your treatment. Your medication WAS a decision between you and your doctor, but now it’s a choice with the pharmacist too. And the pharmacists want VETO power. What if he also objects to certain sleeping pills, pain pills, etc? Certainly, someone somewhere can make a good argument why Jesus doesn’t want you to obtain other legal medicines as well!Yes, the pharmacist has rights, but these rights to not extend to other people. His religious rights do not trump yours, they end where yours begin! Pharmacists fill prescriptions — they don’t overrule doctors. I hope Target takes a stand as a pharmacy for ALL people, not just the Christians.
Dave….you have an 8 year old daughter.
Do you support Planned Parenthoods position that when she’s 14, should the need arise, they have the right and responsibility to take her across states lines to give her access to an abortion clinic WITHOUT your knowledge?
Up for another day in CLE *Continuing Legal Education* and dropped by…
In the US we had dozens (hundreds, really) of white on black murders that were never tried – and we had Jury Nullification of the criminal charge in those few that went to trial.
These cases took place back in the 1960′s but the last trials have happened over the last decade, i.e. Medgar Evers (July 2, 1925 ? June 12, 1963) was an African American civil rights activist from Mississippi who was murdered by rifle on the night of June 12, 1963. White racist Byron De La Beckwith, was twice acquitted by all-white juries (each jury “hung” – thus no “double jeopardy ” attached) and he was finally convicted of murder in 1994.
Will we see the same results in these cases? Does a rape victim have the right to these medications? What about a small community with very, very repressive standards – would a jury there convict an “upstanding” member of the Church & Community of refusing to dispense certain meds to certain people?
A class action targeting Target? Not really possible due to a number of recent changes to F.R.Civ.P. 23 (The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 or CAFA) designed to eliminate these types of cases.
The Courts have been the last refuge from the tyranny of the majority. Today that refuge is showing signs of collapsing in the face of the last 25 years of concerted attacks from Reagan through W.
There is one bright spot: religious bias cases are really on the upswing in employment discrimination litigation. They don’t pay very well at the moment, but that will change. The rhetoric of the Christian Right will bring more litigants and those case precedents will apply to Atheists, too.
As usual, some of you want to muddy the waters by bringing up peripheral issues, but I’m not biting.
More to the point. I ahave been accused on other threads of “answering my own questions”, “holding court”, etc. SO, I’ll just post a few questions and let some of you answer them.
First, a real-life case. A man who worked for a company refused to sign a document the company had created which stated that all employees were committed to diversity to include homosexuals. He refused to sign based upon his religious beliefs. The company took action against this employee. Naturally, the employee took exception to his religious freedom being abused so he fought back in court.
What do you think happened?
Tim, you said,
“This is the land of the FREE, not the enslaved P.C.! “
But you deny that freedom to others who would like to receive their legal medication without the embarrassment of refusal and possible extra travel expenses.
In truth, would you not expect to be served with whatever you required to meet your need, in any type of retail outlet, without being subjected to anothers belief.
Not P.C. just basic human kindness.
Comment from: karen [Member]
Tim
This pharmacist brouhaha is once again about Christians using positions of power to force their religious beliefs on others. You seem to be fine with that.
Religious freedom, my ass. You only mean Christian religious freedom.
You are up way past your beddy-bye time.
Get some sleep and try to think more rationally in the morning.
Karen, as I’ve stated the article doesn’t mention any religion at all.
What are your sources for making these claims?
Comment from: David Silverman [Member] ? http://www.atheists.org/
Phreedm,
Thanks for reinforcing the point I made in the first post. Yes. It is my assertion that nearly all of these pharmacists are religious Christians
Without proof? Not very responsible. These kinds of comments can inflame those with a bias against Christianity. Very dangerous form of journalism.
Yes blogs are the future of journalism. If you read the posts on this thread it appears many have jummped on board with you without any evidence being presented to them.
Kind of a “cyber lynching”.
OK, the article doesn’t point out these are xtian pharmacists, statistics shows most will be. The recent rise of the 4th Reich would also lead your logic in that direction.
Tim, I’m not going to answer b/c I lack the legal knowledge, not a fair question to ask anyone besides Darrow.
I anyone in the USA thinks they are free, they should try NOT working. You are free to be a bum, that’s all.
Unless you got money some other way…
A small story…you might want to skip it:
I used to drink a lot of alcohol. Now I do something else. One day, after many beers, I dived off the boat into the lake. The water was colder than I thought it would be, and my heart went into arhythmia. This had happened before, usually at the time of such suprises, but the condition always went away after a short period of time. This time, however, the condition persisted, and the next morning I went to the hospital.
After discovering that I was fully covered, they put me in the ICU. A lovely young nurse was sent in to interrogate me. Somehow, the conversation turned to God, and I immediately said it was bogus. I said, “By Christian doctrine, most of the Eastern Hemisphere is going to Hell”. She said, “It sounds awful, but that’s the truth”. I said, “You’re a nice lady, but that is bullshit…”
They decided to sedate me in order to give me a jolt with the defib machine, to set my heart straight. The problem was that the sedation had not taken effect before they performed the procedure. When I was jolted, I felt it, and I sprung up and shouted “GODDAMN!” The young nurse literally ran backwards out of the room.
Anyway, I got fixed up at about the tune of $15,000. They put me on Cardizm, which made me feel like a head-on collision would not scare me. But, I still had problems with arythmia, and on several occasions I had to visit with doctors to get it straightened out.
One doctor told me that I could try gagging myself when my heart goes wacky. Guess what? It works. Another doctor suggested that my drinking might be the cause. Guess what? It was. Now that I don’t drink much, I have no heart issues.
I guess the point of this story is that the medical system is foobar enough without religion getting involved to screw it up worse.
Another point is that medical professionals are not gods. They are in the posistion to do a lot of things…like make money for thier employers by bilking insurance companies for unnecessary procedures…or to spread the gospel as they see fit. They are really just like everyone else. You can’t trust ‘em.
My brother lived for 18 years with HIV. He was prescribed a never- ending cocktail of drugs. The side effects were sometimes quite harsh. I know these cocktails were a benefit, but you know what I really think helped him survive so long?
The weed.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. Doctor.
Tim: at the risk of another thread-hijacking, per your example:
I would say that he lost.
I actually do understand why Xtians do these sort of things. I think it was Paul, who told Xtians to obey all laws of the state, unless they were in direct conflict w/their beliefs (or somesuch thing – paraphrase). Can’t say I’m much of a fan of this view, myself.
Now, for counter-example.
I’m a mormon polygamist. (polygamy is legal, for the hypothesis) I have 5 wives, & 2 kids per each wife. My religious beliefs allow me to do this. However, the pharmacist, a staunch fundie baptist, refuses to sell me any diapers, because of HIS religious beliefs.
Who is right?
I am a muslim, I get a job at a butcher’s shop. I refuse to touch pork, even though the shop has an 80% inventory of ham. Should I be able to keep my job?
I am a buddhist. I get drafted into a war. I refuse to fight for my country because it violates my religious beliefs. Should I get court-martialed?
I am a wiccan. My religious rites require that I & my coven dance naked around fires at night, in keeping w/the solstice. But the town I live in has indecent exposure laws. Should I be arrested?
Refusal to address any of these questions would expose your ‘my way or the highway’ philosophy.
I await your response.
Tim
Add this example to RA’s list:
I am an atheist. My president (who swore to uphold the Constitution) announces publicly that because of my beliefs, I should not be considered an American citizen or a patriot.
Do I have cause for redress?
Tim: pre-emptively, this is NOT about Shrub Sr.’s statement.
karen: is that okay?
A little off topic but I want to know why the RR fights so hard save life before birth but does squat after. Is this a punishment thing, you make a mistake are forced to have a baby and then are punished for the rest of your life trying to care for said baby. If the RR is so against abortion then they should also have a few good programs up their sleeves for taking care of the unwanted children after they are born. Maybe they are just meant to end up fodder for Catholic Priests, mmmmm fresh meat.
Also, letting the population expand out of control is not the smartest of moves these days with dwindling resources etc.
RA
O…k…a…y. (She said, quite confused.)
karen:
Was referring to the quote from Bush Sr., 1989, where he said “Atheists aren’t citizens. This is 1 nation, under god, after all.” (paraphrase).
RA
I know. That’s where I got it from. But why are we now going with the approach that that is not what it’s about? I’m willing to go along for the ride, just want to understand.
Just as a general arguement to throw in the mix with the above scenarios, here is a general one.
Why is it that xians want the right to be able to express their personal moral attitudes with blatant discrimination regarding Women’s reproductive rights, LGBT rights, etc, but it is then wrong for someone else to express their moral outrage against xians (this is the classic example of the hypocracy that xians refuse to address). I.E. xians fight for the right to refuse service to people that they feel are outside their moral beliefs (be it the topic of pharmacists or tim’s example of someone refusing to rent to a gay couple), but if someone tried to turn this around and deny service to someone because of their religion there is suddenly a big stink that people are trying to outlaw religion (am I making any sense here).
And just as another conundrum that is a bit off topic but still kind of fits (sorry for all this) – Why is religion a protected class in EEOC legislation (when it is clearly a choice – they have yet to show any genetic keys that shout “this person will be xian, that person will be muslim), and yet they turn around and tell other people that they cannot gain protected status because the xians feel their status is based solely on choice (though there is scientific evidence that homosexuality is biologically derived, possibly as a natural control to overburdened populations)? Just wondering at this logic.
karen: well, for 1 thing, Shrub Sr. wasn’t president at the time. The resident Xtians are quick to point out examples like that.
If it’s okay, can we make the example the current president?
RA
yes, of course. Current president. Sorry for being so dense.
karen: s’alright, dear. Everyone’s human.
If my daughter needed an abortion, and went with someone else to get it, I would have failed to be the wise, trusting and loving father I try to be. It would be her choice in getting it or not, and I would support her decision 100%.
I do have a 14 year old daughter, and I agree with David. If, for some reason I can’t be the one to take her for an abortion, BC, whatever she needs and chooses, I hope someone else will!
can a xtian doctor refuse treatment to a prostitute, drug abuser, homosexual, muslim, atheist, etc. on the grounds such people are offensive to his/her religious beliefs? i think not and pharmacists are really no different in this regard.
Hello everyone:
This is not related to the thread topic, but I did want to share it. Readers of this blog of long-standing will recall that theists like jcc insist that all people have souls which have been divinely created and existed without the body. Many atheists such as myself will disagree and say that a person’s existence (though less romantic to perceive it this way) is really based on a “continuous series of responses to stimuli”. While this article is not conclusive, and not human based it does seem to infer support for my position rather than that of theists:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20051019/hl_hsn/hormonelinkedtoaggressioninmice
RA,
First the answer to the case: The man I mentioned above won his case in court and was awarded damages. The principle the company violated was freedom of religion. There was no legitimate requirement in his job that would have required him to sign the “diversity pledge.” His rights as spelled out explicitly in the U.S. Constitution were violated.
To your examples:
1) “I’m a mormon polygamist. (polygamy is legal, for the hypothesis) I have 5 wives, & 2 kids per each wife. My religious beliefs allow me to do this. However, the pharmacist, a staunch fundie baptist, refuses to sell me any diapers, because of HIS religious beliefs. Who is right?
You are in this case. There is no decision the Pharmacist can make which has a compelling moral dilemma to solve. No one’s life is at stake. No one will be harmed if you are sold the diapers.
2) “I am a muslim, I get a job at a butcher’s shop. I refuse to touch pork, even though the shop has an 80% inventory of ham. Should I be able to keep my job?”
No. As long as you were provided the terms of your employment at the outset, which included cutting meat you have no case. Cutting meat is a “bonafide occupational qualification” in this case.
3) “I am a buddhist. I get drafted into a war. I refuse to fight for my country because it violates my religious beliefs. Should I get court-martialed?”
No. You can get a conscientious objector discharge.
4) “I am a wiccan. My religious rites require that I & my coven dance naked around fires at night, in keeping w/the solstice. But the town I live in has indecent exposure laws. Should I be arrested?”
It depends on where you are. If you are on your own land and not in plain view of anyone, you should be left alone. If you think you can do this in public, you’ve got another thing coming!
I for one do not believe nor disbelieve that we have souls. Do not believe nor disbelieve that there will be an afterlife. There is no proof either way, so, it is the great mistery that we will all meet, someday. I do feel confident that if there is a hell, it would be in a place with a bunch of self righteous christians.
I’ve been reading up on these cases. Not only Ec and BC were refused for filling, but also diet pills and Ritalin.
In some cases, the pharmacist not only refused to fill the Rx, but also refused to refer the patient elsewhere AND refused to give the written Rx back to the patient!
Karen Bauer, president of Pharmacists for Life, even lied to a customer, saying the drug wasn’t in stock when it was. She says you don’t have to obey the law if it contradicts God’s law. (paraphrase)
Hmmm. Technical difficulties here…
Explain please what is the difference between a pharmacist refusing to sell a prescription, and an emergency clinic doctor refusing to sell his services to an injured person after they revealed they are an atheist? The physician could claim it is his belief that god doesn?t want him to treat atheists, because they are evil or otherwise unworthy.
Tim:
Good answers.
“There is no decision the Pharmacist can make which has a compelling moral dilemma to solve. No one’s life is at stake.”
& herein lies the crux of the matter. Purchasing birth control isn’t always about contraception. Sometimes it’s about the woman’s health. DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE?
I did.
& I quote: “In Washington State, Christine was denied birth control pills, even though she was using them as part of medical treatment for ovarian cysts.”
Also:
“In West Virginia, Catherine was prescribed EC by her doctor but was unable to find a pharmacist to fill her prescription in time. A few weeks earlier, she had been treated for a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy.”
Can you honestly tell me these 2 pharmacists were right?
Go back. Read the article. Think before you post.
Test…