|
popeye1250 -> RE: Court rules that pharmacists can refuse morning after pill (11/11/2007 9:59:42 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Marc2b
GoddessDustyGold said:
quote:
And I'm a smoker!
Actually, it is amazing how much less mail I get now that I don't fall into the preferred age parameters of so many profile surfers!
Now I don’t feel so bad about being a smoker myself.
Petronius said:
quote:
Actually it is very simple. The Republicans are whiners again. The druggist is the person who started opposing freedom: the freedom of any person to sell whatever drugs they want and make a profit on it. The druggist doesn't want the local bodega owner to have that freedom; the druggist wants a monopoly, awarded by the state, that significantly reduces competition, and significantly raises his salary. Then, when he gets the monopoly that blocks the freedoms of others, he whines when people actually want him to do the job he was given the monopoly to do.
"Licencing" has been used to restrict competition for ages.
quote:
If you can't do the work of a druggist for moral reasons don't be a druggist. If you're a Jehovah's Witness who doesn't believe in blood transfusions, don't insist on your right to become a surgeon while demanding that you be permitted to skip transfusions. If you think that Black people are the spawn of Satan, don't ask to become a cop and then insist on your moral right to ignore helping crime victims if they're black. etc. etc.
It really is simple: if you accept government regulation to benefit yourself and hurt the other citizens, don't complain about the regulation.
When fargonebagle comes bellowing in with...
quote:
Keep in mind that PHARMACISTS are LICENSED by the State.
You either: (1) Do what the State fucking tells you to do..
OR
(2) Surrender your Pharmacist License, and find a different line of work.
No-one held a gun to their heads and forced them to beg for a license.
... he completely misses the point and I believe you do as well. I am approaching this from a philosophical viewpoint in regards to issues of freedom, personal choice, economics, and most importantly – government power.
Yes, both the pharmacy and the pharmacist must obey the regulations of the state or find another line of work. The question is how much regulatory power do we want the government to have? How much are we willing to let the government micro-manage our lives. In this particular case the questions are:
Who should decide what medicines a pharmacy should stock? The owner of the pharmacy who knows his customers and customer base and who is financially motivated to cater to his customers needs, or a government bureaucracy which is motivated by political concerns?
Who should set the work place rules? Again, the pharmacy owner, with an eye toward profit and a good public image or a government bureaucracy that wont suffer the consequences of it’s decisions?
The problem with regulations is that they attempt to make one size fit all. But one size doesn’t fit all. Pharmacy A – located next to the retirement home – may have no need stock the MAP because nobody’s buying it, whilst pharmacy B – located next to the university – can barely keep the stuff on the shelves. Do we want the government dictating to pharmacy A that it must stock a non-profitable item?
But it is not just business considerations. There is simply the fact that different people have different views, beliefs, etc. Concerning a employees moral objections to dispensing the drug, pharmacy owner A might say "then take a fucking hike ya Jesus freak!" Pharmacy owner B might say, "I respect your belief – if someone comes in with a prescription for the MAP, ask me or the other pharmacist on duty to do it." Why do we want the government interjecting itself into a private matter between two people?
There are times when the government has a legitimate reason, even duty, to override people’s personal choices for the greater good but such times are actually quite rare (although the government would never have you believe that) and I just don’t see this time as one of them.
It just leaves a sour taste in my mouth when people’s first response to a problem (real or perceived) is to run to the government.
I do, however, think that the government should mandate that all young pretty female nurses provide sexual services to their male patients. "Gee, do you really think I’m well enough to go home, Doc? I think I should stay one more night, just to be safe."
Marc, well said.
We are paying the people in *our* government to run our government not to be *dictating* to us.
With freedom comes responsibility. (I know, not a popular word to use these days.)
If one drug store owner chooses not to sell the MAP just go to one that does and leave it at that.
As for rape I'm a stern defender of our Second Amendment Rights.
And ladies, never carry a gun in your purse! It's too easy to get it away from you.
|
|
|
|
