Posted on 04/13/2005 2:55:38 PM PDT by hsmomx3
PHOENIX (AP) -- Gov. Janet Napolitano on Wednesday vetoed a bill to let pharmacists refuse to provide abortion-related medications if doing so conflicts with the pharmacists' moral or religious beliefs.
Napolitano, an abortion rights supporter, did not immediately release her veto letter but said previously she saw the idea as a way to deny legal drugs to consumers.
"You can safely say I view a refusal-to-sell bill with great skepticism," Napolitano said last week.
Supporters expressed disappointment with the veto of what one called civil rights legislation for health care professionals and institutions, which could be forced to contribute "to the taking of an innocent life."
"It is indeed troubling that religious discrimination is becoming an acceptable practice," said Ron Johnson, executive director of the Arizona Catholic Conference. "This bill would have helped."
State law already allows health care workers who invoke such beliefs to refuse to take part in abortions, but the provision doesn't explicitly apply to pharmacists.
Supporters of the proposed change (HB2541) said the same right ought to be extended to pharmacists, who may be asked to dispense emergency contraception. They also said health care workers are under pressure to dismiss their conscience on the issue of abortion.
Opponents say pharmacies already have such policies and predicted the bill would be found unconstitutional if it became law.
The Senate passed the bill April 6 on a 17-11 vote. The bill cleared the House on a 35-24 vote in late February.
Associated Press Writer Jacques Billeaud contributed to this story.
On the Net:
Arizona Legislature: http://www.azleg.state.az.us
Would you do away with all these? Regarding individual religious freedom, how about Congress (or the state) shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof?
How do you get "discrimination" out of any point dealing with this situation? The is no "right" in the Constitution which states that a person cannot be discriminated against in their unhindered access to abortifacients. However, there is a Constitutional amendment that no law can infringe on a persons ability to practice their religion. The Catholic pharmacist who cannot under moral and religious grounds participate in the murder of a baby is who is being discriminated against.
"just wait til you land in an emergency room bleeding severely, and are told you can't have a transfusion because the only doctors on duty at the moment are Jehovah's Witnesses and think transfusions are sinful. If you're still alive at shift change, maybe one of the other doctors will give you a transfusion then."
No one is going to die on the table if they can't get the abortion pill. Nice try. If people don't want to get pregnant - they should not screw around. But your comparison is an amazing stretch.
A couple of years ago when this started coming up (refusal to fill certain prescriptions) I polled all the local drug stores (everybody but Rite-Aid) and they all recognized that the pharmacists oath allowed the pharmacist to either fill, or not fill, a prescription. They would second guess that call.
One guy I talked to recalled that one time a doctor had prescribed two medications, if taken in combination, would have killed the patient. I guess now pharmacists in Az. won't have any choice but to go ahead and fill 'em.
Who knows---the doctor might have been aware of the consequences when he precribed the two medications. Maybe the doctor thought the patient needed death. Why should a pharmacist have the right to object to that? (sarcasm)
"It covers pharmacists' individual decisions to refuse to dispense medication that is right there behind the counter, having been put in stock by the store owner."
Then the owner can fire the pharmacist.
Do you want doctors forced to preform abortions too? Do you want them to be forced to train how to do them, even if they never "chose" to perform them in their "real" careers? How about nurses, should they be forced into the murder for hire business too?
Folks keep thinking there can be a negotiated end to the culture wars, but the only concept they are ever willing to entertain is the pro-life side caving in. Well there are an awful lot of people who just aren't ever going to cave in to the concept that abortion is anything other than the willful killing of innocent life.
Yup! That decision is only between the doctor and the patient! < barf >
excuse me
your religious discrimination against others is not a free market,
nor is it american.
It's not clear that the owner would be able to fire the pharmacist, when there's a state law guaranteeing pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense certain medications.
And yes, all ob/gyn residents should be required to learn to perform abortions. Not all abortions are elective, and an ob/gyn should be familiar with techniques in his/her field that may be necessary to save a patient's life.
"your religious discrimination against others is not a free market"
Huh?
My post was a hypothetical of a bigot who refused to hire Christians. The bigot would eventually lose out to someone not so closed-minded, in that the Christians could be hired cheaper, and the goods sold at a lesser price, until equilibrium is reached and all are paid the same.
The point was that a free market takes care of bigots by competitive pressure.
Similarly, in this instance, a free market would take care of pharmacists. Indeed, I could see pro-life and pro-abortion niche markets being developed --- makeing everyone happy --- and needing no interference by the government.
The only thing bigoted here is the State's interferance with a Christian's right to practice his religion. That's not "American." Indeed, such an abuse violates the First Amendment.
Good for her!
She also vetoed the requirement to show an I.D. to register to vote and vote in Arizona. What a "slippery slope" that would have been. The people voted that requirement in. Crazy Janet vetoed it.
What a gal!
Sarcasm/off
Napolitano is a real one-termer.
"BC pills are used to treat..."
Things other than getting pregnant. My wife was prescribed the pill after having a hysterectomy. And my cheap-a$$ insurance company refused to cover the prescription because "We don't cover birth control", my explanations that it wasn't for birth control not withstanding.
Still, if I own the drugstore, I just put up a sign in plain view stating that the store's policy is not to sell birth control devices or medications. My prerogative. If I work for the store and refuse to sell legal product that my employer stocks, then I will be terminated for not being able to adequately perform my job. It isn't all that complicated.
This would, of course, require "clinical" experience, wouldn't it? Just a few murders, and you too can be an OB/GYN! I believe they already mandate that in NYC. Mayor's a Republican . . . like you.
Yes, much better that the Commissars tell me where and when to empty my bowel.
I think if one thinks the government can force one to sell what the government orders, then the first "one", that would be you, would have been an ardent supporter of Mussolini.
Just a thought but isn't every "choice" we make essentially a discrimination?
If a doctor prescribes a medication, the guys behind the counter's job is to fill it. The only place for them to second guess a physician's patient care decision is if there is a potential interaction.
Birth control drugs are generally hormones that are used for other purposes. The pharmicist knows a little about drug chemistry, but doesn't know why a doctor prescribed the drug. It's not their place to second-guess that decision.
And if a Doctor prescribed a lethal dose of potassium in a state that just passed euthanasia friendly legislation?Don't get me wrong I can see both sides, but if the employer is OK with the state law of conscientious refusal then I don't see aproblem with refusing, if you believe very strongly that what you are doing is wrong.
A very good friend of mine quit her pharmacists job which she had for many years and took a low paying job as a nurses aide because she could not in good conscience dispense these meds anymore. I admire her for living her faith.
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.