Replies

The pharmacist also has the right to find another employer, or chose not to work for said employer, if they know this employer sells the products in question. If accomodations are to be made on the business end, then the business in question can have another pharmacist fill the order. The question I just though of involves the pharmacy itself. Does the pharmacy stock the drugs in question and does the pharmacist have to request the stock from distribution? If the pharmacist stocked it, then why not dispense it? Or if the company provides it through a computerized inventory system, then why not refuse delivery of the products? Or is this an attempt to get some media attention on an issue the pharmacists feels strongly about? It sounds like a pharmacist that wants to pontificate to patients.

"The pharmacist also has the right to find another employer, or chose not to work for said employer, if they know this employer sells the products in question. If accommodations are to be made on the business end, then the business in question can have another pharmacist fill the order. The question I just though of involves the pharmacy itself. Does the pharmacy stock the drugs in question and does the pharmacist have to request the stock from distribution? If the pharmacist stocked it, then why not dispense it? Or if the company provides it through a computerized inventory system, then why not refuse delivery of the products? Or is this an attempt to get some media attention on an issue the pharmacists feels strongly about? It sounds like a pharmacist that wants to pontificate to patients."

I disagree. The Pharmacy does NOT sell the product when that Pharmacist is on duty. As per my above post, it is inconceivable that the store would seek to enforce a directive that an employees violate religious beliefs. The store may choose to stock and order what they wish; the Pharmacist must NOT be compelled to murder an innocent infant.

The Pharmacist in question must indeed not "pontificate" on the issue; he must NOT attempt to sway the patient to his moral belief system. He merely has to say that his moral beliefs do not allow him to fill that prescription. He has the right to refuse to murder an innocent child; the patient has no right to seek to compel him to violate his religious beliefs. The patient DOES have the right to go elsewhere.

Have so many Freepers forgotten the words LIBERTY and FREEDOM? Didn't the Pilgrims, as well the early citizens of Maryland, come to this country for freedom of religious expression? I am stunned to see so many posts advocate that certain religions should be excluded from the practice of Pharmacy. To be consistent with the spirit of liberty and freedom that out nation is based on, the PERSON does not have to alter his basic moral and religious beliefs to accommodate the profession; the profession needs to recognize that people of a given morality/religion must never be compelled to violate these beliefs. The patient is FREE as well to choose another Pharmacist.