The latest insanity in america

Drug store operaters dictating moral values

Published on April 14, 2005 By Moderateman In Health & Medicine

Picture this, you are a gay man, walk into a drug store with your partner and try to buy some condoms, the pharmacist refuses to sell condoms because in his mind homosexuality is evil.

A female walks into the same store asks for birth control, the drugman says no, birth control is against my religion.

A hetrosexual couple walks into the same store,asks for condoms and the druggist asks "are you married?" before selling them or not.

This is really happening, right now, here in america.

Has the world gone insane?

Comments (Page 1)

bakerstreet

on Apr 15, 2005

Has the world gone insane?

No. I don't agree with the practice, personally, but you have to allow people the right to do business the way they want. I wouldn't think a such phamacist would be very competitive unless he operated in a very, very backwater, morally conservative area. In that case he'd probably be giving the communitee what they want.

It's more of a small symptom of a large problem, i.e. morally conservative America feeling like they are obliged to validate lifestyles they may adamantly disagree with. I'd be willing to bet that you won't find a handful of such stores in a nation with tens of thousands of them.

ParaTed2k

on Apr 15, 2005

People forget that when they are working for someone else, they don't get to make policy for the company. If that pharmacist wants to decide what he will and won't sell, then he needs to open his own pharmacy. Until he does, he is accepting a paycheck from a company and is responsible to that company to uphold their policies.

If the pharmacist did open his own drug store, and chose to offer beer, would he feel the same about an employee who breaks his policies by refusing to ring up beer for customers who choose to buy it from his store?

dharmagrl

on Apr 15, 2005

If that pharmacist wants to decide what he will and won't sell, then he needs to open his own pharmacy. Until he does, he is accepting a paycheck from a company and is responsible to that company to uphold their policies.

Exactly.

bakerstreet

on Apr 15, 2005

" People forget that when they are working for someone else, they don't get to make policy for the company. If that pharmacist wants to decide what he will and won't sell, then he needs to open his own pharmacy."

I assume it is his own pharmacy. Nothing here states otherwise.

Dr Guy

on Apr 15, 2005

No. I don't agree with the practice, personally, but you have to allow people the right to do business the way they want.

I agree with Baker. For this is not a cut and dried as your simple examples indicate. California, your state, is trying to dictate to Catholic hospitals that they perform abortions, something clearly against their doctrine. And that is the state dictating to religion.

It is not like a Catholic hospital is the only place a person can get an abortion. There are chop shops on almost every corner in this country that will gladly do it. But it is the supposed moralist trying to tear down a religion that they do not agree with.

IN your examples, if you own the business, there is a simple solution. Make it a policy not to stock the objectionable items. Period. People can always get it from somewhere else, and the market will decide if you stay in business following your own set of morals.

You do not have that luxury when you work for someone else, as you have to follow their policies.

But do not deny me my beliefs and force me to violate them just because you are too lazy to walk down the street to another place that will accomodate you.

WHile my Church also is against contraception, I would not have a problem selling condoms to whomever, but I can see where some would. But I do have a real problem with anyone trying to make me perform an abortion just because it is legal. It is legal (if wrong), and you can get it from a Presbyterian or Methodist. You do not have to make me compromise my beliefs to get what you want.

Zoomba

on Apr 15, 2005

Should the same pharmacist be allowed to deny service to a black man because he thinks them inferior? How about refusing to sell anything to a woman without a husband or a father present to approve the purchase.

It's a fine line to walk when you bring your personal morality into managing a business or providing services.

Dr Guy

on Apr 15, 2005

Yes it is, for any moral objection can be turned into a prejudice one, and vice versa. However, we are not talking inferior, but immoral. And I suppose is someone could prove that they belong to a religion that believed that (since none realy exist today), then, besides being just an ignoramus, they should be allowed to do it. And the market could then decide.

I am not hurting you by refusing you service in my establishment. You do have alternatives. I am only hurting myself, and so I better have a good reason to, or I am just cutting off my nose to spite my face.

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: BakerStreetPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005Has the world gone insane?No. I don't agree with the practice, personally, but you have to allow people the right to do business the way they want. I wouldn't think a such phamacist would be very competitive unless he operated in a very, very backwater, morally conservative area. In that case he'd probably be giving the communitee what they want. It's more of a small symptom of a large problem, i.e. morally conservative America feeling like they are obliged to validate lifestyles they may adamantly disagree with. I'd be willing to bet that you won't find a handful of such stores in a nation with tens of thousands of them.

I think that ANYONE ramming there religious morality is just plain wrong, and on top of that, real bad buisness.

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: ParaTed2kPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005People forget that when they are working for someone else, they don't get to make policy for the company. If that pharmacist wants to decide what he will and won't sell, then he needs to open his own pharmacy. Until he does, he is accepting a paycheck from a company and is responsible to that company to uphold their policies.If the pharmacist did open his own drug store, and chose to offer beer, would he feel the same about an employee who breaks his policies by refusing to ring up beer for customers who choose to buy it from his store?

Good question ted, I think if we allow anyone to dictate there moral view from a service standpoint we are in trouble.

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: BakerStreetPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005" People forget that when they are working for someone else, they don't get to make policy for the company. If that pharmacist wants to decide what he will and won't sell, then he needs to open his own pharmacy."I assume it is his own pharmacy. Nothing here states othe

I did not get that info from the news show I was watching {joe scarborough}

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005No. I don't agree with the practice, personally, but you have to allow people the right to do business the way they want.I agree with Baker. For this is not a cut and dried as your simple examples indicate. California, your state, is trying to dictate to Catholic hospitals that they perform abortions, something clearly against their doctrine. And that is the state dictating to religion.It is not like a Catholic hospital is the only place a person can get an abortion. There are chop shops on almost every corner in this country that will gladly do it. But it is the supposed moralist trying to tear down a religion that they do not agree with.IN your examples, if you own the business, there is a simple solution. Make it a policy not to stock the objectionable items. Period. People can always get it from somewhere else, and the market will decide if you stay in business following your own set of morals.You do not have that luxury when you work for someone else, as you have to follow their policies.But do not deny me my beliefs and force me to violate them just because you are too lazy to walk down the street to another place that will accomodate you.WHile my Church also is against contraception, I would not have a problem selling condoms to whomever, but I can see where some would. But I do have a real problem with anyone trying to make me perform an abortion just because it is legal. It is legal (if wrong), and you can get it from a Presbyterian or Methodist. You do not have to make me compromise my beliefs to get what you want.

terrific points doc, succient.

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: ZoombaPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005Should the same pharmacist be allowed to deny service to a black man because he thinks them inferior? How about refusing to sell anything to a woman without a husband or a father present to approve the purchase.It's a fine line to walk when you bring your personal morality into managing a business or providing services.

yes once these kinds of practices start, where do they stop, does a muslim that owns a store refuse service to a jew or visa versa.

Zoomba

on Apr 15, 2005

I do agree though, that any merchant dumb enough to take that attitude likely isn't going to last long since eventually they'll just piss off most of their customer base and they'll go elsewhere.

I have no problem if a business owner chooses to not provide given services or products because they don't believe in them, but I don't think they're allowed to selectively decide who can and can not purchase products they do sell. If you sell condoms, you don't get to choose which people get to buy them. You shouldn't be able to play selective morals depending on the day of the week or phases of the moon.

How long would I last without being sued if I only sold services to people who belonged to a certain political party? I could even post a sign saying "Voter Registration Card required as part of ID Verification. We do not provide services to Democrats due to moral objections" Switch Democrats with whatever your own political affiliation is and think of how you would feel, and what you would want done about it.

"And the sign said long haired, freaky lookin people, need not apply..."

thatoneguyinslc

on Apr 15, 2005

There is legislation pending on the federal level that would allow a "hand off" to another pharmacist to insure that service could not be denied based on the pharmacist's personal beliefs.

My friend Mike is a pharmacist. He was telling me that it is a major problem nowadays. He works with two other pharmacists who are both active Mormons and they are considering denying filling scrips based on their ethics.

But he also told me that the company policy is to fire any employee who refuses to do their job. Good call!

Moderateman

on Apr 15, 2005

Reply By: thatoneguyinslcPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005There is legislation pending on the federal level that would allow a "hand off" to another pharmacist to insure that service could not be denied based on the pharmacist's personal beliefs.My friend Mike is a pharmacist. He was telling me that it is a major problem nowadays. He works with two other pharmacists who are both active Mormons and they are considering denying filling scrips based on their ethics.But he also told me that the company policy is to fire any employee who refuses to do their job. Good

real good call, to deny someone a serive based on personal beliefs is insane, are we ready to go back to the days of jim crow> white and black water fountains>?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!