[M. Dodge Thomas]

Exactly. I don't to want to hear from some druggist, for example, that my Viagra is a "lifestyle" drug, and they don't want to fill my prescription.

Married or single, straight or "gay", it's none of their damn business - and if they don't want to fill a prescription written by an MD, they need to find another line of work were they are allowed to impose their opinions on everyone else.

[FormerACLUmember]

Exactly. I don't to want to hear from some druggist, for example, that my Viagra is a "lifestyle" drug, and they don't want to fill my prescription. Married or single, straight or "gay", it's none of their damn business - and if they don't want to fill a prescription written by an MD, they need to find another line of work were they are allowed to impose their opinions on everyone else

We are talking about RU-486 here folks. This drug kills over 50% of the people who receive this drug. This is not a "lifestyle drug."

[John Robertson]

I think there's another way to look at it. You say, the druggist should find another line of work, if he doesn't approve of dispensing birth control pills. You invoked a "lifestyle" issue, talking about Viagra, gays, etc. I think you missed the point altogether.

The pharmacist is pro-life, and views dispensing the pills as participating in murder. A moral stand.

Do you have any moral stands? And what is your line of work? What if you were requested to do what you do for someone you disapprove of, on strong moral grounds, and the government said No, you must do it? That's the issue: Can the government force you to do something against moral and/or religious beliefs.

As for this instance, it's not about the lifestyle. It's about life.