Pharmacist refuses to sell birth control pills

[Guest CronoT]

http://www.elpasotimes.com/stories/...29-148612.shtml

 

A Fabens pharmacy owner is one of hundreds of pharmacists worldwide who are refusing to dispense medically prescribed birth control pills for religious or ethical reasons.

 

"Since this was in the news, I've gotten calls from people who are upset with me and others who see no problem with it," said pharmacist Steve Mosher, who owns the Medicine Shoppe in Fabens. "Some people are even blaming me for teen pregnancies in Fabens."

 

Idalia Moran, who is staying temporarily in Fabens with her mother, said she was shocked when she tried to obtain birth control pills on Saturday at the Medicine Shoppe, the only private pharmacy in the small town east of El Paso.

 

"A person at the counter told me that the pharmacist wasn't going to sell them to me because it was against his religion," Moran said. "I said, 'What?', and I had to go to a Walgreens in El Paso to get them. My husband was very upset. It's stupid. What does religion have to do with my prescription?"

 

What do you think about this? I'm a Christian, but I think one of the worst things a Christian can do is force his or her values onto another person.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

He's not forcing it, really. If they want them, they can go somewhere else and get them.

 

It's inconvient and kinda dickish, sure, but he's not forcing people to stop taking birth control or anything.

[Guest Smues]

Simple: Don't have a job that contradicts your religion if you can't deal with it. At least this isn't as bad as the guy who refused to sell the morning after pill to a girl that got raped.

[Guest SP-1]

The issue as a Christian is whether or not we encourage others to sin in something like this. I can understand his reasons and if its his pharmacy then he has the right to not carry those products. If someone has to drive a little farther to get the stuff then they'll just have to.

 

It doesn't mean he's "forcing" his views on these people. He's upholding his views as he thinks he should. He's not the only source in the world to gain borth control. If anything he's taking a monetary hit by doing this. Nobody loses except him.

 

And the people blaming him for pregnancies in the area need to teach their kids how to say no or deal with what happens when they have sex. Or just go to another pharmacy.

[Guest CronoT]

The issue as a Christian is whether or not we encourage others to sin in something like this. I can understand his reasons and if its his pharmacy then he has the right to not carry those products. If someone has to drive a little farther to get the stuff then they'll just have to.

 

It doesn't mean he's "forcing" his views on these people. He's upholding his views as he thinks he should. He's not the only source in the world to gain borth control. If anything he's taking a monetary hit by doing this. Nobody loses except him.

 

And the people blaming him for pregnancies in the area need to teach their kids how to say no or deal with what happens when they have sex. Or just go to another pharmacy.

I'm not surprised you don't know this, SP, but that pharmacy is the only pharmacy for about 25 miles. Yes, while it is our responsibility as Christians to encourage people to accept Christ and our values, giving people no choice over the matter is wrong. I don't know about you, but I don't want this country to turn into a theocracy. Iran's a real good example of why not.

[Vyce 0]

What do you think about this? I'm a Christian, but I think one of the worst things a Christian can do is force his or her values onto another person.

And once again the free exercise of religion is confused with "pushing" religious values upon another.

[Guest SP-1]

The issue as a Christian is whether or not we encourage others to sin in something like this.  I can understand his reasons and if its his pharmacy then he has the right  to not carry those products.  If someone has to drive a little farther to get the stuff then they'll just have to.

 

It doesn't mean he's "forcing" his views on these people.  He's upholding his views as he thinks he should.  He's not the only source in the world to gain borth control.  If anything he's taking a monetary hit by doing this.  Nobody loses except him.

 

And the people blaming him for pregnancies in the area need to teach their kids how to say no or deal with what happens when they have sex.  Or just go to another pharmacy.

I'm not surprised you don't know this, SP, but that pharmacy is the only pharmacy for about 25 miles. Yes, while it is our responsibility as Christians to encourage people to accept Christ and our values, giving people no choice over the matter is wrong. I don't know about you, but I don't want this country to turn into a theocracy. Iran's a real good example of why not.

Vyce nails it in the post right after your's which I quote.

 

I don't think he's trying to force his views on these people. But somewhere, we've got to draw a line and start acting like we really believe what we believe. What this guy is doing is a FAR cry from America turning into a Theocracy. A theocracy wouldn't be good for the church or for the country, I don't think. It'd be like a political version of the Crusades. We cannot force our views on others. But we can, and must uphold our beliefs and stop acting like we're scared to offend someone by doing what we think is right.

[2GOLD 0]

Sorry, this is bull.

 

He's in a job where his religion should not be involved. If he wants a job where his "religion" is involved, then he needs to get one that doesn't involve something like this.

 

Also, a married woman wasn't even allowed to get them? Gee, glad to see the only reason to have sex is to pop out babies now. Complete and total bs is what this is.

 

This isn't just about teens but hey, if he wants to do it then fine and dandy. Religion or not, he's still a dick.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Gee, glad to see the only reason to have sex is to pop out babies now.

 

I find it odd that you say that sarcastically, even though you probably know that the Catholic Church considers it true.

[Guest SP-1]

Sorry, this is bull.

 

He's in a job where his religion should not be involved. If he wants a job where his "religion" is involved, then he needs to get one that doesn't involve something like this.

 

Also, a married woman wasn't even allowed to get them? Gee, glad to see the only reason to have sex is to pop out babies now. Complete and total bs is what this is.

 

This isn't just about teens but hey, if he wants to do it then fine and dandy. Religion or not, he's still a dick.

I think you're missing the point somewhat. I don't think it's just an abstinence issue for him with sex before marriage. I could be wrong but it could also be viewed as an abortion issue. He may feel that, regardless of whether the couple is married or not, its wrong to meddle with the body's ability to have life created in it.

 

He has every right to be in his profession. Pharmaceutical work isn't just about birth control. He dispenses medicine to people who actually NEED the medicines, not just the couple trying to shirk the responsibility of having sex.

[EricMM 0]

as far as I know there's not law that says any pharmacy has to carry any particular product...

 

I of course think he's a jerk for doing this, but whatever. Yes, he's pushing his religion on people. BUT if his concience (sp) won't let him dispense birth control... then... what can you do?

 

I wonder if he sells other birth control?

[2GOLD 0]

as far as I know there's not law that says any pharmacy has to carry any particular product...

 

I of course think he's a jerk for doing this, but whatever. Yes, he's pushing his religion on people. BUT if his concience (sp) won't let him dispense birth control... then... what can you do?

 

I wonder if he sells other birth control?

 

The Church is missing a GOLDEN chance here!

 

"HOLY BIRTH CONTROL PILLS!"

 

It can have a picture of Jesus on the cross with a bunch of pregnant women looking up at him on the cover. It'll sell HUGE and it will also guilt people into waiting.

[Highland 0]

If he has birth control pills and other contraceptives in stock, then he his a hypocrite for refusing to sell her those birth control pills.

 

I wonder how we would feel about those Christians that would allow their child to die from a completely curable illness because they don't believe in medicine? Whst if this pharmacist was one of those and refused to sell medicine because of his beliefs?

[2GOLD 0]

If he has birth control pills and other contraceptives in stock, then he his a hypocrite for refusing to sell her those birth control pills.

 

I wonder how we would feel about those Christians that would allow their child to die from a completely curable illness because they don't believe in medicine? Whst if this pharmacist was one of those and refused to sell medicine because of his beliefs?

 

...I'm pretty sure he would be out of business in a month since he would be spending money and not making any.

[Guest thebigjig]

I have this kind of argument with my friends all the time... I see the entire matter as being ridiculously stupid. If the guy can't do his job because of his religious convictions, then he should find a fucking job that won't interfere with them.

 

---

 

Many of my hardcore Christian friends are completely against the morning after pill because it prevents "life" or birth... but when they fuck their girlfriends and boyfriends (which last time I checked, was ALSO a sin), they have no problems with using condoms... which also prevents life

 

Yes yes, I know the difference between the two scenarios, but the IDEA is still the same, in that you're preventing a life from forming either way.

 

"eeeevery sperm is saaacred, eeeevery sperm is great... if a sperm is waaasted, God gets quite irate"

[Jobber of the Week 0]

If you cannot do your job because of your religion, then don't do that job. No one has asked this guy to use birth control himself. Because of his decision, there's a higher risk that people without have sex without protection and we'll have another unwanted child in this world.

 

If you are going to work in the profession of medicine, airline pilot, the military, and other careers, you need to make sure you can do your duty without conflicting with your religion.

 

Supposedly, this guys sins will be absolved, so for now he should stop worrying about the specks in his neighbors' eyes and realize everything's going to be alright.

[Vyce 0]

Yes yes, I know the difference between the two scenarios, but the IDEA is still the same, in that you're preventing a life from forming either way.

 

The idea is NOT the same.

 

One form of contraception prevents conception from even occurring.

 

One, theoretically, terminates the fertilized egg after conception has already taken place.

 

I don't even have a problem with the morning after pill, but the ideas are not the same thing.

 

Because of his decision, there's a higher risk that people without have sex without protection and we'll have another unwanted child in this world.

 

Isn't that really more of the fault of the people who decide they're going to fuck anyway, WITHOUT protection?

 

I don't think the blame should fall on him at all. It's silly what he's doing, but he's not obligated to provide contraceptives, and I'd find it hard to imagine that there isn't a clinic or hospital in that area that doesn't provide contraceptives to those who need them.

 

If the people in his community still decide to have sex without protection, it's their fault - not this guy's.

[Guest thebigjig]

The idea is NOT the same.

 

One form of contraception prevents conception from even occurring.

 

One, theoretically, terminates the fertilized egg after conception has already taken place.

 

Yeah but then you get into the whole argument on "where life begins" which can become quite the headache... and besides, the point of the morning after pill, is precautionary... in most cases, no one knows whether the girl is pregnant anyway! It's done "just in case" so therefor you don't know if she's destroying anything or not.

 

If the people in his community still decide to have sex without protection, it's their fault - not this guy's.

 

No one's blaming him for that... I'm blaming him for simply not doing his job

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

But it's HIS store. He owns it and has no obligation to anyone. He's the one taking a financial hit for this. He's not forcing anything on anyone. He owns a business and he's deciding what products he'll carry.

[Guest SP-1]

But he is doing his job, jig. His pharmacy is still open and he's still giving medicine to sick people. people who need medicine to live.

 

He's just not giving it to the people who want to fuck like rabbits and not be responsible for it. Guess what? That's his right. He's not shirking his duty. And if he were, he'd be shirking his duty to people who want to sin, but not to God.

 

Guess who is more important in that equation.

 

 

 

 

 

(Yes. That's my F-bomb for the year.)

[Guest thebigjig]

But it's HIS store. He owns it and has no obligation to anyone. He's the one taking a financial hit for this. He's not forcing anything on anyone. He owns a business and he's deciding what products he'll carry.

Just because it's HIS store doesn't mean we can't question the logic in what he is doing! I don't give a rats ass if it's his store or not, I'm still going to criticize him.

 

He's just not giving it to the people who want to fuck like rabbits and not be responsible for it.

 

I don't view this as a responsibility issue... I view it as a legal drug issue that's not being sold to anyone because of a religious conviction problem. Letting religion cloud logic and more importantly, the law, is one of my biggest annoyances.

 

What if he refused to sell Advil because of some insane religious doctrine that he read into? Would you defend him then? Because afterall, it's HIS store

[EricMM 0]

Seriously I don't even know why this is an issue.

 

If someone decided not to sell brocolli because it was "gross" or SUV's because they were "awful" or Dean Koontz books because they were "boring" there wouldn't be this kind of outcry.

 

It's really really his choice.

 

I would personally chose not to go to his store at all. Since I'm assuming he still sells condoms, it's not even like he's not selling anything.

 

Again, he's a jerk and an idiot for doing it. He needs some theology lessons. But, people have done stupider things for religion. At least he's not hurting anyone.

[Guest SP-1]

I'm not entirely suer where you're drawing that he needs theology lessons. Though I'm not sure what kind of theology you mean.

 

The man percieved a problem with what he was doing. He did something about it.

 

 

And: Advil is an entirely different issue than birth control medication. Invalid.

 

Also: Religion isn't clouding his logic. I'd say he's thinking alot more clearly than alot of Christians do. he's not letting people or business matters push him into doing something that, at the end of the day, is wrong. That's admirable for an American Christian.

Edited July 31, 2004 by SP-1

[Guest thebigjig]

And:  Advil is an entirely different issue than birth control medication.  Invalid.

 

Different in purpose... same in legality

 

Also:  Religion isn't clouding his logic.  I'd say he's thinking alot more clearly than alot of Christians do.  he's not letting people or business matters push him into doing something that, at the end of the day, is wrong.  That's admirable for an American Christian.

 

That's debateable... but I really don't wish to go into another abortion argument

 

Either way, I agree that it's not that big of a deal... I just think he's a fool

[Guest SP-1]

Even outside of it being a possible abortion issue, the guy's standing up for what's right.

 

That's more than alot of people do. Especially lazy, cowardly American Christians these days.

[Guest SP-1]

By the way I'm not flaming anyone or anything. I just have a very large soapbox to stand on when it comes to how American Christians have becomes emasculated pushovers. I'll try to keep that a little more subdued in the future.

 

Unless its warranted.

 

But I've said enough here.

 

Return to the regular topic.

[Vyce 0]

The idea is NOT the same.

 

One form of contraception prevents conception from even occurring.

 

One, theoretically, terminates the fertilized egg after conception has already taken place.

 

Yeah but then you get into the whole argument on "where life begins" which can become quite the headache... and besides, the point of the morning after pill, is precautionary... in most cases, no one knows whether the girl is pregnant anyway! It's done "just in case" so therefor you don't know if she's destroying anything or not.

You said there is no difference - all I pointed out to you is that, at least in the mind of a follower of Christian doctrine (and presumably that's what this guy is), there is a rather HUGE difference. One prevents life from ever happening, the other potentially destroys life after it's begun (with conception) - the most rudimentary form of life, but if you believe life begins at conception, it doesn't matter to you.

 

If the people in his community still decide to have sex without protection, it's their fault - not this guy's.

 

No one's blaming him for that... I'm blaming him for simply not doing his job

 

Jobber appears to actually be blaming this guy.

 

So, to everyone who lives in this guy's community: if you have unprotected sex tonight, and get a disease or an unwanted pregnancy: you know who to REALLY blame.

 

I don't view this as a responsibility issue... I view it as a legal drug issue that's not being sold to anyone because of a religious conviction problem. Letting religion cloud logic and more importantly, the law, is one of my biggest annoyances.

 

What law is he violating here?

 

No offense to you, but when it comes to constitutional issues, people always screw up and think that somehow private individuals or companies are violating someone's constitutional rights. Here's the answer: in the private realm, your constitutional rights mean shit.

 

He's a private individual. He owns his own store in Fabens, which is a private company, unless I'm mistaken and the government owns some percentage of them.

 

If this was an instance of a GOVERNMENTAL body or official refusing to provide contraceptives, then you may be running into a due process issue, and this man's actions might be in violation of the law. But as it is, unless there's some wacky state law which requires that pharmacy owners sell contraceptives (and I doubt that there is), then he's not violating the law here at all.

 

This is a weird, stupid thing he's doing, but again, he's under no legal obligation to sell condoms, etc. I'd even argue that, based upon his belief system, he's under no MORAL obligation to sell them either.

 

What if he refused to sell Advil because of some insane religious doctrine that he read into? Would you defend him then? Because afterall, it's HIS store

 

I would defend him, yes. I would find it as equally ridiculous as what he's doing here, but it's his choice as to what he sells in his store. And again, he'd be under no obligation to sell Advil if that's what he doesn't want to do.

 

I'm still not quite sure what the fervor over this is. I'd be shocked if there were NO other places to buy contraceptives in that community. Hell, they sell condoms and other such items in fucking grocery stores here in the D.C. metro area - I have to imagine that there's literally a dozen or more places people will turn to if they can't buy rubbers from Johnny Christian here.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Jobber appears to actually be blaming this guy.

 

So, to everyone who lives in this guy's community: if you have unprotected sex tonight, and get a disease or an unwanted pregnancy: you know who to REALLY blame.

First of all, don't hold bigjig responsible for what I'm posting, thank you.

 

Second of all, while I personally believe the guy should lighten up (as I mentioned in my post about how, spiritually, your sins on this world are atoned for), that doesn't tie in directly to this issue. Birth control pills are one thing, but the precedent scares me. What happens if my doctor perscribes a painkiller medication for me (not necessarily over the counter Advil like Jig suggested, but something prescribed by a Doctor) and the pharmacy refuses to carry it for religious reasons? I'd have to get it filled at another pharmacy, which would require going back to my doctor, probably having to muck around with the health insurance company, etc.

 

Over the counter birth control pills aren't at the same level as that, but there are people out there who don't believe in the help of medicines in various cases for religious reasons. If they want to suffer for God, then fine. But we're all in trouble if they get behind our pharmacy counter.

[MrRant 0]

It would be easy to just get things filled at a corporate pharamacy then. Walgreens, Rite-Aid etc.

[Dr. Tom 0]

It's his store. If he chooses not to sell it, as much as I find his reasoning backward-thinking, ignorant, and downright silly, then he doesn't have to sell it.