Posted on 05/03/2005 5:33:17 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
Rebecca Polzin walked into a drugstore in Glencoe, Minn., last month to fill a prescription for birth control. A routine request. Or so she thought.
Minutes later, Polzin left furious and empty-handed. She said the pharmacist on duty refused to help her. "She kept repeating the same line: 'I won't fill it for moral reasons,' " Polzin said.
Earlier this year, Adriane Gilbert called a pharmacy in Richfield to ask if her birth-control prescription was ready. She said the person who answered told her to go elsewhere because he was opposed to contraception. "I was shocked," Gilbert said. "I had no idea what to do."
The two women have become part of an emotional debate emerging across the country: Should a pharmacist's moral views trump a woman's reproductive rights?
No one knows how many pharmacists in Minnesota or nationwide are declining to fill contraceptive prescriptions. But both sides in the debate say they are hearing more reports of such incidents -- and they predict that conflicts at drugstore counters are bound to increase.
"Five years ago, we didn't have evidence of this, and we would have been dumbfounded to see it," said Sarah Stoesz, president of Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota. "We're not dumbfounded now. We're very concerned about what's happening."
But M. Casey Mattox of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom said it is far more disturbing to see pharmacists under fire for their religious beliefs than it is to have women inconvenienced by taking their prescription to another drugstore. He also said that laws have long shielded doctors opposed to abortion from having to take part in the procedure.
"The principle here is precisely the same," Mattox said.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Then I guess you do not shop at any pharmacy or store with a pharmacy in it. According to you, they all support abortion pills. That would include Walgreens, CVS, Wal Mart, Target, Publix, etc. If you have a job with good drug beneifts, you probably have oral contraceptives covered. I guess you better give up your insurance. If you are in college, well, what can I say. Most, but not all, student health plans cover oral contraceptives. You will need to live in a cave to avoid businesses that, in some way, do not fund oral contraceptives.
The Church will allow a premature delivery in order to baptise the child if it is medically and morally certain that the child will otherwise die prior to birth.
Otherwise, you are right, prematurely induced labor is condemned.
Nobody is asking anyone to sacrifice themselves. The Church is aksing people not to commit murder.
What the hell do you know about my moral convictions? See it's folks like you with your holier than thou attitude that gives the other side cause to label conservatives busy body kooks who want to control what happens in grown folks bedrooms. There are medical reasons other than birth control which require women to take the pill. That reason does not have to be disclosed to anyone but her physician not you, I, nor the self-righteous pharmacist at Walgreens. As for not wanting to do business with me consider it mutual.
Pull the feeding tube. If the child can be saved, the child must be saved in order to be baptized even at the cost of the mother's life. One of the risks of life as a woman is that you may die from pregnancy. Unfortunately, very few people are able to think rationally about this topic, and it is generally used to create specious justifications of direct murder of the child in order to prevent women from succumbing to one of the risks of their nature.
Really, its a simple question. Would you rather be responsible morally for the direct murder of a child (possibly your own), or the unintended but inevitable death or a mother (possibly your wife) from a natural medical condition? The answer to that sort of question, and the justifications attempted, says much about a person's character, IMHO.
(Not that I agree with the whole feeding tube thing anyway, but that is another story ...)
Unfortunately, the Original Sin of Adam and Eve has dictated otherwise - pain is a part of life. Deal with it like a man, and let your woman face it like a real woman.
How strange that the relief of pain is a moral justification for chemical abortions!
Thank you for posting that dubium.
Praise God for enlightenment and repentance on your part in this.
Without the Pill, there would have been no Women's Movement. Think about that.
My qualification was to baptize the child that would otherwise die in the womb. The Baptism of the child is more important than not forcing a premature delivery.
God's blessings upon you sister.
We heartily agree on something ...
There are many things in your body, which if taken in too large a dose, can result in death.
A large dose of these hormones results in the death of a human life in the zygote phase by preventing its implantation in the maternal womb.
I said before my wife had similar symptoms. She bore with them, and they went away once we were married and began having intercourse and then children.
I don't know where you dreamed this up from, but quite simply it is not Catholic Teaching at all. You are still refusing to provide a citation in this regard.
The obligation of married couples to have children is a matter of social justice - it provides for the continuation of the human species - therefore it is related to the rational needs of humanity in this regard. It is not a matter of sexual morality, whereby if one is having sex, one must be having children. It is perfectly allowable to abstain from sex in order to not conceive provided one intends to fulfill ones marital duties to the growth of society and the needs of the Church by providing at least 4 children.
A person runs into trouble where they are married and are avoiding fertile sex in order to not fulfill their duty to society.
Its not the importance of the "risk" of pregnancy, but rather always remaining open to life by not vitiating the natural end of the action.
Contraceptive sex is really no different morally than bullimia. Just as it is sinfully glutonous to ea or drink and then prevent digestion by binging, so it is sinfully glutonous and lustful to have sex and prevent contraception by blocking the progress of fertilization.
Contraceptive sex is really a species of whoredom. The woman is being used as an object of sexual pleasure alone, rather than treated in her natural role as a companion, helpmate, wife and (potential) mother.
If you read my words, I said "many." That does not mean "all."
The point is, once again (and I don't see why this is so difficult to understand) that the contraceptive mentality encourages people to engage in sexual activity before they are prepared to handle parenthood. This leads to abortion.
Without contraceptives and the contraceptive mentality these people, especially the young ones, might treat sexuality with a more grave attitude.
SD
NFP allows women to space, delay or limit children, for good reason.
How many stories do we need to read from the NY Times about bitter, lonely middle aged "career women" before we wonder if perhaps women aren't more fulfilled as mothers than as corporate bbigshots?
SD
I assume, then, that you have dental work done without novocaine or other anesthesia?
The woman's suffrage movement was active several decades before the the pill.
I'd guess you have some interesting ideas on the woman's suffrage issue, too.
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.