Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Women sue Wal-Mart over access to emergency contraception
Boston Globe ^ | February 1, 2006 | Brook Donald

Posted on 02/02/2006 4:44:48 AM PST by sweetliberty

Edited on 02/25/2006 4:48:56 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

BOSTON (AP) -- Three Massachusetts women backed by pro-abortion rights groups sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, saying the retail giant violated a state regulation by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.

The suit filed in Suffolk Superior Court seeks a court order compelling the company to stock the so-called "morning after pill," in its 44 Wal-Marts and four Sam Club stores in Massachusetts, all of which have pharmacies.


(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: abortionpill; prolife; walmart; whiningfeminazis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: sweetliberty

At least the pills are not made in China.


22 posted on 02/02/2006 4:59:37 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
"Women shouldn't be refused needed medication."

Poison to kill a baby isn't 'needed medication'. These hags can find all the time in the world to harass stores and pharmicists and yet not spend 2 minutes putting on a condom or taking a frikkin pill or slapping on a patch or any of the many other option available to avoid pregnancy.

I think they get off on the control issue, having that god like power of life or death over a baby. Foul Wh***s

23 posted on 02/02/2006 5:00:34 AM PST by SouthernFreebird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eeevil conservative
where is the law that states EVERY pharmacy must carry ALL possible prescribed medicine?

Right next to the one that says real estate attorneys like me have to take very axe-murderer defense case that walks in the door.

24 posted on 02/02/2006 5:03:33 AM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
"The women said they knew they would be refused when they went to the Wal-Marts in Quincy and Lynn and that the action was planned with the abortion rights groups and lawyers."

So, these three individuals went to the Wal-Mart knowing full well that the store did not stock the product they wanted, and yet they are telling people that Wal-Mart 'refused' them the pill? That seems like a pretty big difference to me. I could maybe, maybe, understand a comaplint to Wal-Mart corporate requesting/suggesting that they carry the pill, but as soon as I saw that they were seeking 25 million in damages they lost any and all credibility. They suffered no injury by the actions of Wal-Mart, so I am a bit baffled by this whole thing. Can some of you lawyer-types add some insight?
25 posted on 02/02/2006 5:03:48 AM PST by FairfaxVA (SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0. Zero rows returned!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem
This case is a loser for the plaintiffs; based on nothing but lies and exaggerations.

You are not familiar with Massachusetts jurisprudence.

They kept full-on "blue laws" (no Sunday shopping) right up into the eighties.

They closed all the state mental hospitals and blamed the ensuing surge in homelessness on Ronald Reagan.

The suddenly found a clause promoting same-sex-marriage in the 200 year old state Constitution.

Former governor Dukakis once proclaimed that homeowners had no right whatsoever to fight back against robbers.

26 posted on 02/02/2006 5:04:10 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty

Haven't these women heard of a drugstore? Yeah, yeah, I understand some Wal-Mart's have every department under the sun, but really?


27 posted on 02/02/2006 5:05:34 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dmz
nice typo in the comic.

Actually, it would be a hando.

28 posted on 02/02/2006 5:06:23 AM PST by Maceman (Fake but accurate -- and now double-sourced)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

Looks to me like another case of Jackpot Justice. A few people band together, find a willing attorney to file a frivolous lawsuit and then hope the company will settle instead of going to court because it's cheaper


29 posted on 02/02/2006 5:07:15 AM PST by WildWeasel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

They planned this. It was all about making money pushing an evil agenda.


30 posted on 02/02/2006 5:07:18 AM PST by sweetliberty (Stupidity should make you sterile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FairfaxVA

this is what you call a Jesse Jackson style "Shake down"

all you have to do is file a suit of big $$$$$$$$

the LEGAL fees for Walmart to defend itself will be ridiculous.......and with the way the MEN IN BLACK operate these days......the chance of them winning bears worse odds than a coin toss....

these baffooooons are the epitome of litigious terrorists....

when will people wake up and stop trying to get out of jury duty....jury duty is not just a civil duty..it is our VOTE and VOICE on the court systems.....(although THIS case will probably be decided by a judge, not a jury...)

the OJ case is the perfect example of VOTING from the JURY box....


31 posted on 02/02/2006 5:10:02 AM PST by eeevil conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dmz
nice typo in the comic.

Good eye.

32 posted on 02/02/2006 5:10:29 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
They planned this. It was all about making money pushing an evil agenda.

They certainly did. $25 million is a mite steep.

33 posted on 02/02/2006 5:10:32 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
Two words:

TORT REFORM


34 posted on 02/02/2006 5:11:09 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: eeevil conservative
this is what you call a Jesse Jackson style "Shake down"

God, I love Wal-Mart, but I bet Wal-Mart caves.

35 posted on 02/02/2006 5:12:38 AM PST by BigSkyFreeper (Proud to be a cotton-pickin' Republican on the GOP Plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: FairfaxVA

I think under other circumstances this might be called... entrapment?


36 posted on 02/02/2006 5:13:18 AM PST by william clark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: angkor

You're not trying to cheer me up, are you?


37 posted on 02/02/2006 5:15:41 AM PST by LIConFem (A fronte praecipitium, a tergo lupi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sweetliberty
I was gonna try disecting the law to see if it in fact requires all pharmacies to sell these poison pills, but why bother, the courts up there will figure out a way to read that into whatever the laws say anyway. The Mass legislature also doesn't hestitate to pass whatever overreaching, onerous laws they can think up too, including lots of them trying to outlaw basic laws of economics that invariably create scarcity of whatever product they're trying to regulate. (But, who am I to talk about that, I live in Maryland! BTW, did you see our lovely senator the other night on TV?
38 posted on 02/02/2006 5:17:30 AM PST by poncho67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Question:

If Wal-Mart became a club-style store such as Cosco would they be exempt from so many lawsuits?

Cosco aren't unionized either and they impact environment standards by huge parking lots for their big box stores - but nobody ever touches them with lawsuits.

Is it because they have a membership rather than the casual shopper? Wal-Mart already has their Sam's Club stores - why not the Wal-Mart Club stores too? Would it make any difference? All these lawsuits are going to trickle down to the consumer - thus raising the prices offered to people now.

I don't know the prevailing laws on this.


39 posted on 02/02/2006 5:19:26 AM PST by imintrouble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Maceman; dmz
Actually, it would be a hando.

I thought he was talking about the misspelling of the word "perception". Why is it a "hando"?

40 posted on 02/02/2006 5:20:04 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson