Posted on 10/05/2008 12:12:12 PM PDT by forkinsocket
A woman was refused the "morning-after pill" by a supermarket's duty pharmacist because it was against his religious beliefs.
Ruth Johnson, 33, who has two children, including a month-old baby, had not been using her usual method of contraception with her fiancée.
She went to the Tesco dispensary in Hewitts Circus, Cleethorpes, Lincs, and asked an as assistant for the pill Levanelle.
Miss Johnson was told it could only be dispensed by the locum pharmacist who was called to speak with her.
She said: "He came out from behind a screen and told me that he would not be allowing me to buy the pill from him because he had a right to refuse to sell it on the basis of his personal beliefs.
"The pharmacist was of Asian origin so I asked him if it was because of his religion and he replied 'Yes'."
Miss Johnson, from Cleethorpes, was left feeling ashamed and worried and complained to the store manager who told her they couldn't force the pharmacist to sell the product.
She said: "I asked him if a Jewish or Muslim checkout operator could refuse to sell pork or alcohol or if a Jehovah's Witness could refuse to sell birthday and Christmas cards."
Her concern is that the policy could deter teenage girls from seeking the morning-after pill.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Murder is everyone’s business. And we each retain the right and responsibility not to participate in murder.
If you really don’t know the difference between preventing a pregnancy from occurring, and killing a person who exists, you need more than advice from and an anonymous FReeper.
can’t have freedom without life, jmack.
So, you don’t have any rational, considered, or even slightly informed reason for your bald-faced, false assertion that there is a material difference between Plan B and any other oral contraceptive.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Wow! Hip boots, and a clothes pin.
So nu? I'll bless their hearts, if they get in a fluff!
Exactly as you must deal with your illiteracy.
I applaud your perseverance in the face of your obvious handicap.
But you are also infringing on freedom when you force a pharmacist to sell pills that he doesn’t agree with. Nobody is talking about locking up pharmacists who offer such pills.
If the customer doesn’t like it, she can go to another pharmacy. If the owner doesn’t approve of the pharmacist, he can fire him. There is no need to get the govt involved. Isn’t that the libertarian approach?
So.. you think illiteracy is admirable and desirable?
What are you trying to do here? Do you have anything substantive to say?
Look at you with those capital letters!
Well done!
OK, but you are still a little jerk. :P
My point is: You are insinuating that the employee has the right to hold a private business to his beliefs.
Would you extend this power to all employees or just ones who agree with you?
Well, if trying to keep FR from looking like it is populated by 13 year old texting teens makes me a jerk...
I'll be your jerk.
I'm a pretty big jerk, though.
Technically, you have posted your opinion.
Now we know.
If you ever get liberals to agree with you on abortion, it will be a matter of time before they propose a giant government agency to over see attaching some random person with some type of organ failure to you, maintaining if you refuse to allow this person to be your siamese twin you’d be killing them, as you are the best tissue matched candidate. After all, life trumps all, even your freedom.
I hope you didn't spend much time coming up with that, it has to be one of the worst arguments for keeping abortion legal I've ever come across.
Second, the fact that you clearly can't see a difference between dogs and humans troubles me, but it also suggests that arguing with you is a waste of time.
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.