We don't want to see the morning after pill and the RU486 being sold by illegal drug dealers. Far better to obtain them legally, under a doctor's care.
Then let the doctors sell them.
Who are "we"? "We" should simply go to a pharmacy that carries the pill. Or ask the gubmint to force the doctors that prescribe the morning after pill to supply it to their patients. No need to try and coerce Walmart.
We don't?
What is the principle here? It SOUNDS like,"People will break the law in a way dangerous to themselves, so we should make what they want to do legal."
I agree that it is sad if an armed robber is gunned down by the, um, robbEE, if the robbee has the wits and guts to be prepared and to act on the preparation. But I don't think we should make robbery legal in order to make things safer for the robber.
What am I missing?
Is it a legitimate principle of licensing that the issuer of the license gets to require you to do stuff you think wrong? If so, then some pharmacists have a duty to look for another line of work, or the same line in another place.
Pro-abortion feminists are not happy to have the "right to control their own bodies," as they put it. They want to force other people to cater to their choice. Surely, logical consistency compels you to agree that if no one may force a woman against her will to become and remain pregnant, no one may be forced against their will to assist a woman to avoid pregnancy or to abort a child.
"We don't want to see the morning after pill and the RU486 being sold by illegal drug dealers. Far better to obtain them legally, under a doctor's care."
Yeah, making someone walk down the street to the CVS or Walgreens is sure to cause this.
So much for "pro-choice" meaning "freedom to choose."
BTW, in regard to the headscarf thing...how does getting rid of headscarfs stop terorism, or even slow down the transmission of radical ideology?