If you sell condoms, you don't get to choose which people get to buy them.

That was better stated than I did. But I have said that in previous threads. Stil, that gets you a cookie.

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

So I stuck my hair up under my hat and went in to ask him why.....

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

I just cut my hair off and sent the 17 inch ponytail to "locks of love" who provides free hair peices to children that are having chemo therapy and have lost there hair.

I like cookies

I guess this is happening more often than I thought. The case with which I have been following happened here in Wisconsin. Not only did the pharmacist refuse to fill the prescription, but it was also Sunday when the woman's doctor could not be reached to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. The pharmacist apparently also refused to give the woman her perscription slip back to her.

Not only did he refuse to fill the prescription, but he felt that his religious beliefs went to far as to prevent her from getting the hormone replacement medicine from anybody... and no, since it was a pharmacy in a major chain store, he didn't own it.

Reply By: ParaTed2kPosted: Friday, April 15, 2005I guess this is happening more often than I thought. The case with which I have been following happened here in Wisconsin. Not only did the pharmacist refuse to fill the prescription, but it was also Sunday when the woman's doctor could not be reached to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. The pharmacist apparently also refused to give the woman her perscription slip back to her.Not only did he refuse to fill the prescription, but he felt that his religious beliefs went to far as to prevent her from getting the hormone replacement medicine from anybody... and no, since it was a pharmacy in a major chain store, he didn't own it.

I am glad that did not happen to my wife, although old and ill I still would have went over the counter and taken her script back, maybe would have taken his lunch money too....... bawwwwwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I think you guys are losing track of what "rights" are. This has the creeping stench of the ACLU on it.

There's no reason we should be forced by the government to do business with ANYONE we choose not to. You don't have the right to say anything you want here, and you don't have the "right" to force the owner of a private business to sell you something when he doesn't want to.

If a store owner refuses to sell you something, he isn't preventing you from buying it, you can just go down the road to the next store. If, on the other hand, you force that store owner to do business according to YOUR ideals, then his rights have been soundly abused.

So, people who want to force pharmacists to do business against their will are much more in the business of treading on people's rights.

There's no reason we should be forced by the government to do business with ANYONE we choose not to. You don't have the right to say anything you want here, and you don't have the "right" to force the owner of a private business to sell you something when he doesn't want to.

I agree, I would be completely against the government telling a private business owner which legal products can and can't be sold. On the other hand, that same private business owner has every right to set the policies for his or her business. The employee does not, however, have the right to decide which policies he or she will and won't comply with.

It I was a grocery store cashier, would you put up with me ringing up your whole order, but refusing to ring up your beer?

*boggle*

No offense, but I dunno wtf you are talking about, para. If it is a "rogue cashier", then it isn't a policy, and there is nothing to bitch about. They just get fired, the people get apologized to, yadda yadda. It wouldn't be news, because they wouldn't last 10 minutes.

"It I was a grocery store cashier, would you put up with me ringing up your whole order, but refusing to ring up your beer?"

What do you mean "put up with?" I would have him call the manager over, and I'd either get my beer or go elsewhere. As a 35 year old, married male, if they aren't gonna sell to me, there's no point in carrying it. Regardless, they have the right to refuse to serve anyone they want.

If I say they have to buy from me, how much different would it be for someone to tell me I have to buy from them. Same difference.

No Bakerstreet, owners can't pick who they serve and who they sell to...

Such actions are illegal under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If things like that really happen, they should complain.

J.E: Care to post what it says about a private business, and the penalty, if any?

Here's what I found. The description stated is "It prohibited discrimination in public facilities, in government, and in employment."

The parts pertaining to private businesses seem to deal with employee discrimination based on race, etc. The penalty for any such descrimination would have to be civil, since states issue business licenses, etc.

If what you were saying was true, then any business that posted the sign "We reserve the right to refuse to serve..." would be liable, since why they were refused is your word against theirs.

P.S. I would add that even if it did cover such in that law, it wouldn't apply to homosexuals or any of the people mentioned in the blog above, since race, religion and sex seem to be the worded descrimination.

P.S. It could be argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would protect employees of national chains, given that it would make their employment dependant on sacrificing their religious beliefs.

I've been reading on this some since this blog was posted, and I have found that in Illinois, the Governer is trying to force pharmacists to carry ALL drugs and dispense them, even if the pharmacy doesn't want to. That would mean that even if a pharmacist opted not to carry the "morning after pill", they could lose their state business license for doing so.

That is heinous. That isn't descrimination, that is simply opting not to carry a product.

I have found that in Illinois, the Governer is trying to force pharmacists to carry ALL drugs and dispense them, even if the pharmacy doesn't want to. That would mean that even if a pharmacist opted not to carry the "morning after pill", they could lose their state business license for doing so. That is heinous. That isn't descrimination, that is simply opting not to carry a product.

And it is wrong. For that clearly does dictate religious beleifs. I can see where 'if you have it, you must sell it'. But if in my beliefs, I do not believe in the morning after pill, and choose not to stock it, then that is my right as well. I am not denying you access as I am not a monopoly (and they operate under different laws).