Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning after pill


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning after pill Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 3:42:35 PM   
FangsNfeet


Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline 		When  it comes down to it, how many pharmacist/pharmacies are going to refuse to fill the prescription?

If a Dr wrote the script and wants the patient to have the pill, then the doc will just give it to the patient directly. Doctors can store drugs and keep samples.

I'm still a little confused by this law. After all, a retail store has always had the right to serve or not to serve any customer. No matter what the law now says, I don't see women having a very difficult time buying the Morning After Pill.

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

(in reply to Goddess20)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 3:50:41 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		I'm glad to hear it.  Pharmacists really shouldn't have been forced to do something so heinously objectionable.

(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:32:49 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessDustyGold

It is not about those who might have a more difficult time because there is not a drugstore on every corner. 
It is not about those who do not want to expose themselves by going to an emergency room. 
It is not about a win for the republicans.
It is not about pharmacies being a part of the healthcare system.  (They are not, btw, they are private businesses.)
The real issue here lies in the interference of the courts into private matters, and the way people so quickly lose sight of the precedents being set over and over. 
The real issue here is that, once again, a whiner with a bug up their ass ran to Nanny and cried "No fair, make it better for me". 
The real issue here is that the judge actually ruled in favor of the whiner instead of saying "grow up and follow the rules of the boss, or go get another job."
It is about another loss of personal freedom.


Does it not seem to you that this is about the loss of personal freedom for pharamists?  Or are you of the opinion that nurses should be made to masturbate elderly patients who can't do it themselves, despite the nurse's objection?  It is, afterall, part of her job.

Heh.  I'll tease you about the questionable orders soldiers today are legallly obligated to refuse, despite the fact that doing so is contradicting their superiors and job description, later.

(in reply to GoddessDustyGold)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:36:59 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		LMAO

I knew someone would,... "go ridiculous"... sooner or later..

lol

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 11/10/2007 4:37:20 PM >

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:41:52 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		I find it's often prudent to make ad absurdum arguments.  Tends to be easier to point out to someone that their arguments are obliviously silly since it's a little harder rationalize.

Not that I'm one to underestimate the ability of the human ego to overlook logical fallacies.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:46:08 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

I find it's often prudent to make ad absurdum arguments.  Tends to be easier to point out to someone that their arguments are obliviously silly since it's a little harder rationalize.

Not that I'm one to underestimate the ability of the human ego to overlook logical fallacies.


Or are you of the opinion that nurses should be made to masturbate elderly patients who can't do it themselves, despite the nurse's objection?  It is, afterall, part of her job
 
I rest my case....

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:47:16 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		I'm at a loss to understand what point you're trying to make, unless you're agreeing with me?

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 4:57:03 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

I'm at a loss to understand what point you're trying to make, unless you're agreeing with me?


I think I was clear.Any clearer and I`ll be getting another Mod 11 email/virtual hand slapping.You`re not worth it.lol

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:01:43 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		Meh, if it's just an insult, that's probably better to keep to yourself.  But if you just disagree with me and care to make your case for why, feel free!  There's nothing wrong with speaking your mind, even if it's in sharp disagreement.

Hell, I'd be pretty bored and stupid if everyone always agreed with me.  Where's the intellectual growth in blind appeasement?

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:01:54 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		His point is that masturbating patients and providing a morning-after pill don't belong together in anyone's mind except that of a right-wing ideologue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

I'm at a loss to understand what point you're trying to make, unless you're agreeing with me?

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:02:03 PM   
Gwynvyd


Posts: 4949
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Don't forget people, the Republican nutjobs are the same ones who are preventing public funding for the vaccine against HPV, the virus that causes uterine cancer.  Why?  Because they hope that the threat of cancer will keep kids from having sex.  It is the high tech method of stoning women to death.

So when you hear them wringing their hands over things like not wanting the day after pill because it might make "incest and abuse" harder to find, realize they will say ANYTHING, do ANYTHING to return us to the dark ages of back alley abortions.


Completely agree. The "Moral Marjority" will by any means available to them do what ever it takes to try to get more people to have less sex. They dont care how many people they kill or effect with horrible things like teenage pregancy, AIDS, STD's or what have yous from lack of education and available resources. As long as they stopped at least a few people from having sex for a little while the rest are sinners and deserve what they get. How screwed up is that?

Smaller communities do not carry the Plan B pill. You get a prescripion from the hospital or refering Dr. ( not to mention how many Rape and incest cases are not reported to the police, only a general visit to a Dr. with a I am worried I am pregnant ~ lets not forget those poor women ) and you take it to your pharmacy.

I think if people were more aware of what the Plan B pill actualy is they would be more OK with it. It does not abort and already formed fetus. It is just a super dose of Birth Control hormones, to keep the egg from attaching.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception 

as some one else said if a woman wants a sermon.. she will go to church.

I could personaly never have an abortion.. But I beileve every woman has the *right* to make that choice for herself.

Gwyn

_____________________________

Self avowed Geek-Girl~
Come for the boobs, stay for the brains.

Be the kinda woman that when your feet hit the floor in the morning the Devil says "Oh shit, shes awake..."
~ Softandshy's "Shiney"

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:06:44 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

His point is that masturbating patients and providing a morning-after pill don't belong together in anyone's mind except that of a right-wing ideologue.


Bah, I so often forget just how much of rational thought is just a part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:15:45 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

His point is that masturbating patients and providing a morning-after pill don't belong together in anyone's mind except that of a right-wing ideologue.


Bah, I so often forget just how much of rational thought is just a part of the vast right wing conspiracy.


"rational thought "
 
Today, is not backwards day...

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:17:46 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		Please, let's not argue.  I'm open to debate if you'd like to make a point, but not this.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:18:52 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zensee

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

The whole point of the OP and article was that pharmacists DON'T have to sell the product thanks to a judge. The regulations by "The People" coincide with certain pharmacists beliefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. The opinion of one judge coincides with a certain opinion held by a subset of the general public.  Big difference.


Please educate us oh wise one on the "big difference" between what I said and you said.


quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

ORIGINAL:Goddess20
Its just another thing that stupid people haven't looked in to and don't understand but have some 'moral' objection to without having the knowledge to know what they are objecting too! 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I kinda think a pharmacist knows a lot more about the pills they're dispensing than your average Goddess. After all, they go to school for six years to learn this shit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No again. While a pharmacist might refuse to fill a prescription for reasons like drug incompatibilities or counterindications, their professional knowledge of drug efficacy does not extend to knowing and interpreting the will of "god".


What does my pointing out that your average pharmacist isn't stupid, have to do with God? I didn't mention God once in my post, you assumed pharmacists subscribe their morals to religious teachings, which you couldn't possibly back up with any source whatsoever.


(in reply to Zensee)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:21:41 PM   
GoddessDustyGold


Posts: 2822
Joined: 4/11/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessDustyGold

It is not about those who might have a more difficult time because there is not a drugstore on every corner. 
It is not about those who do not want to expose themselves by going to an emergency room. 
It is not about a win for the republicans.
It is not about pharmacies being a part of the healthcare system.  (They are not, btw, they are private businesses.)
The real issue here lies in the interference of the courts into private matters, and the way people so quickly lose sight of the precedents being set over and over. 
The real issue here is that, once again, a whiner with a bug up their ass ran to Nanny and cried "No fair, make it better for me". 
The real issue here is that the judge actually ruled in favor of the whiner instead of saying "grow up and follow the rules of the boss, or go get another job."
It is about another loss of personal freedom.


Does it not seem to you that this is about the loss of personal freedom for pharamists?  Or are you of the opinion that nurses should be made to masturbate elderly patients who can't do it themselves, despite the nurse's objection?  It is, afterall, part of her job.

Heh.  I'll tease you about the questionable orders soldiers today are legallly obligated to refuse, despite the fact that doing so is contradicting their superiors and job description, later.


*Ha*
If they take the job, they take what comes with the job. If the scope of the job changes, then they can find other work or make special arrangements without running to a court of law.  This is a moral issue, not a legal issue.
Your example of the nurses is absurd, but you already knew that.   
And, as I am sure many of you have already determined...I am on the right side of the political spectrum.
It is not about "Plan B".  It is about the misuse of the judiciary to settle a moral dilemna.  It is not their place.
And that is what makes Me on the "Right"! 
In My opinion,  of course! 

_____________________________

Dusty
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
B Franklin
Don't blame Me ~ I didn't vote for either of them
The Hidden Kingdom


(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:34:01 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline 		It's absurd, certainly; since I can draw it to the pharmist-having-to-do-his-job bit, it's analogous.  This argument points out the fallacy of the reasoning.  Therefore, it is not logically unreasonable to say that a pharmicist can not opt out of a portion of his job that he finds to be absurd?  Further, does this inclination strike as unjustifable on the basis that you can not empathize, or do you find there to be some difference?

Over, since I suppose this isn't the driving point of your argument, then allow me to ask.. do the courts not have the obligation to serve to protect the rights of individuals' constitutional rights, such as the freedom of religion, which, in practice, extends to the freedom of philosophical stance?

Pardon me if it seems that I pick on you, but I assure you, it's for fondness's sake.

(in reply to GoddessDustyGold)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:36:19 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Therefore, it is not logically unreasonable to say that a pharmicist can not opt out of a portion of his job that he finds to be absurd? 


A pharmacist who finds dispensing medicine "absurd" might want to think about a new line of work.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:37:26 PM   
Zensee


Posts: 1564
Joined: 9/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

I find it's often prudent to make ad absurdum arguments.  Tends to be easier to point out to someone that their arguments are obliviously silly since it's a little harder rationalize.

Not that I'm one to underestimate the ability of the human ego to overlook logical fallacies.


Reductio ad absurdum arguments never function to point out genuine flaws in another's arguments. Reductio ad absurdum is a form of logical fallacy (forgive me for using the term correctly here) intended to bury an opponents point in your own concocted exaggeration of their argument (for instance, 'if you believe pharmacists have no right to apply their morality to your choices you must approve of prostituting nurses').

Reductio ad absurdum is not at all suited to clarification or instruction - it is used to mock, annoy, confound and to cover for the absence of cogent ideas on the part of the absurdist.

Hardly surprising that you do not "underestimate the ability of the human ego to overlook logical fallacies" since it overstatement and invention are you main stock in trade on this board.

And before you engage in further whining about insults and the like, consider your own words in the preceding posts. Pot / kettle / black, and all that.


Z.




_____________________________

"Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water." (proverb)

(in reply to CuriousLord)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning aft... - 11/10/2007 5:41:52 PM   
CuriousLord


Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Therefore, it is not logically unreasonable to say that a pharmicist can not opt out of a portion of his job that he finds to be absurd? 


A pharmacist who finds dispensing medicine "absurd" might want to think about a new line of work.


Then would you say that a nurse who would not service the physical needs of her pacients should find a new line of work?

Or, if this argument is unpleasant, then who is to say that such a pill is a medicine?  Biologically, it strikes me as quite poisenous!

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning after pill Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094