[hopespringseternal]

Should a pharmacist's moral views trump a woman's reproductive rights?

It's the new moral paradigm: Your vocation trumps your principles. That is why lawyers, journalists, and politicians can be lying scumbags while claiming to be moral people. The company needs you to fudge some numbers? Impugn someone's record to make them easier to fire? Tell a few lies to employees and customers? Don't worry, you won't be held accountable, it's your job.

There was a time that even someone with authority over you telling you to do a wrong thing did not remove your responsibility to do what was right. But now anyone, even a total stranger, can command your moral principles to suit themselves and you aren't responsible.

[thedilg]

(Should a pharmacist's moral views trump a woman's reproductive rights?)

Just how does a pharmacist trump a women's reproductive rights by refusing to fill her prescription? I live in a small town and there is at least 10 places that a prescription can be filled. It is not as if there is a government monopoly.

The system can easily accommodate both parties.

Godspeed, The Dilg

[texgal]

While at the local courthouse we were seated in an empty jury room used for negotiations between attorneys. Something on a piece of paper caught my friend's attention and he pulled it out. It was an agenda for seminar for continuing education credits in ETHICS for attorneys. One of the topics, presented by a nationally known attorney, was entitled "Why Laywers Have to Lie".

Mind you, this was a seminar for ETHICS credit.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Fanatics should not be working as pharmacists when they believe they can impose their "morality" on others.

[Nowhere Man]

It's the new moral paradigm: Your vocation trumps your principles. That is why lawyers, journalists, and politicians can be lying scumbags while claiming to be moral people. The company needs you to fudge some numbers? Impugn someone's record to make them easier to fire? Tell a few lies to employees and customers? Don't worry, you won't be held accountable, it's your job.

I can add hitmen to the list. I remember when I was in college, we did a study on hitmen in sociology class. Basically even though their line of work was sickening morally, they do lead normal (well as normal as can be) home lives, have families, and the like.

There was a time that even someone with authority over you telling you to do a wrong thing did not remove your responsibility to do what was right. But now anyone, even a total stranger, can command your moral principles to suit themselves and you aren't responsible.

Sort of like a reverse Nuremburg Trials in a way, "I vas just vollowing orders!" B-P

[HairOfTheDog]

But now anyone, even a total stranger, can command your moral principles to suit themselves and you aren't responsible.

OK, but I hope you will agree that a pharmacy can fire or refuse to hire pharmacists who refuse to do all parts of the job.

If I were a pharmacist, I would object to people taking the menopause drug Premarin (Made from PREgnant MAre urINe) because of the deplorable life of the mares and unwanted foals that are disposed of as a side effect of the creation of this drug. If I refused to handle it on those grounds, is that principle also worthy of protection if I choose to become a pharmacist? How about a pharmacist that won't dispense drugs that are tested on animals?

I hope you would protect the right of pharmacies to fire those people.