New arena for birth-control battle

Star Tribune ^ | May 3, 2005 | Rene Sanchez

[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.

[FreepinforTerri]

I'm not surprised that you can spell that accurately.

[SoothingDave]

A fair point. However, my argument remains the same: we have decided to exclude certain things, such as abortion and self-defense, from the definition of "murder."

Legally, yes. Though "we" is a bit vague. Self-defense as a valid excuse comes to us through common law and several millennia of Christian experience.

Abortion came as a proclamation from a court. And it is still very much in dispute.

The Court seemed to have erred in jumping ahead of the consensus, which has had very bad effects on politicising the judiciary and polarizing politics.

SD

[FreepinforTerri]

I have a master's degree and SPELLCHECK. I'm okay. Thanks.

[unbalanced but fair]

Sorry, I don't bother arguing with someone who can't answer a simple question.

[Antoninus]

If these pharmacists are morally opposed to filling a perscription, as per a physician's orders, they need to find a different line of work. It is not their place to hold moral judgement over what a specific medication does.

On the contrary, if I owned a pharmacy, I'd make it very clear that we DON'T DO BIRTH CONTROL and if you wanted a script filled for one, you'd have to take it somewhere else. As far as I'm concerned, your opinion is like forcing a bookstore to dispense porno magazines because "It is not their place to hold moral judgement over what a specific publication contains."

[FreepinforTerri]

You're evidently scared to death to actual discuss the subject, as interesting as my GPA, my spelling, and my grammar might be.

[Antoninus]

Your analogy falls far short of the reality. Pharmacies are private businesses, and as such have the right to set their own policies and procedures. If a woman presents a prescription for the "morning after pill", the pharmacist is NOT imposing his moral values on the woman if he refuses to fill the prescription; she is, after all, free to go to any other pharmacy she chooses. It is the woman who is imposing HER moral values on the pharmacist by demanding he assist her in killing her baby.

The people who don't understand this point are not stupid. Their argument is utterly without foundation, so they must create false premises to make it stand up even a little.

[FreepinforTerri]

That was an intended insult of yours, not a simple question. And you try again with the insults.

I have no problems with not arguing with you anymore either.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

50% of dead babies killed by abortion therefore by your thought standards had "reponsible" parents.

Don't you EVER EVER project your fanaticism on my 'thought standards'.

[Dont Mention the War]

Aww. You were trying to be offensive. How cute!

No, I was being insulting. Any offense taken by you is but icing on the cake. And judging by the fact that you had to respond twice to my single post, one of which was required multiple paragraphs to contain all your psychological projections, it appears to have worked.

[FreepinforTerri]

I'll direct you to my former statements of "I have a master's degree a spellcheck" and "it's easier to denounce my grammar and spelling than my argument"

[FreepinforTerri]

You are the hero of school-yard bullies in junior high schools everywhere. You should be proud.

[unbalanced but fair]

No one is scared to death.

Psst...I'll let you in on a secret. They're laughing at you. And any way, you're the one who keeps bragging about her grades and her degree. So that makes it fair game.

[Modernman]

The Court seemed to have erred in jumping ahead of the consensus, which has had very bad effects on politicising the judiciary and polarizing politics.

IMO, Roe. v. Wade is one of the worst legal decisions of the 20th Century. My very liberal, very pro-choice Constitutional Law professor even admitted that it was a poor legal decision, even though she liked the outcome.

Abortion is a pure states-rights issue. The Federal government and the Federal judiciary have no power to ban or legalize the procedure any more than they have the power to regulate state laws regarding tattooing or bodypiercing.

[FreepinforTerri]

Feel free to brag about yours, grammar nazi.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

And you STILL don't get the point? What does that say?

It says " I didn't know that 'good Christian girls found it acceptable and cute to tell someone to F*ck off".

[Modernman]

On the contrary, if I owned a pharmacy, I'd make it very clear that we DON'T DO BIRTH CONTROL and if you wanted a script filled for one, you'd have to take it somewhere else. As far as I'm concerned, your opinion is like forcing a bookstore to dispense porno magazines because "It is not their place to hold moral judgement over what a specific publication contains."

I agree completely. Telling a pharmacist he needs to sell contraception is like telling the corner store that it needs to stock Pepsi.

[FreepinforTerri]

I never mentioned my grades.

Furthermore, this was an adult discussion until you moved it to my supposed 'frigidness' and 'dyslexia'...

I'm neither frigid nor dyslexic, but apparently smarter than you all.