# Catholic pharmacist refuses to sell Morning After Pill. Should he have that choice? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 24, 2004, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453 "2004-11-24T11:28:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Fuji\_Kitakyusho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f0a364/32.png) [@Fuji\_Kitakyusho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji_Kitakyusho)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/81 "2004-11-25T05:38:43Z")
I’m a bit perplexed that pharmacists are not required to adhere to a professional code of ethics or standards - something along the lines of “I promise to do my @#$%ing job, or else I’ll find a more suitable career.” ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/82 "2004-11-25T05:47:56Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > Yeah, and then get sued for religious discrimination. It’s all about how you ask the question…it really isn’t about religious discrimination if you ask the question this way… Legal interview question: If you were given a prescription for birth control, would you fill it? (No discrimination lawsuit) Illegal interview question: Are you Catholic and if you are, how do you feel about filling out birth control prescriptions? (Discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen) > [@](#): > > What I want to know is, why would a strict Catholic even want to work as a pharmacist, knowing they’re going to have to dispense birth control at some point during their lives? That’s like an anti-abortion person getting a job as an abortionist, or an Orthodox Jew working as a bacon taste-tester. If you can’t do the whole job, for whatever reason, it’s stupid to train for it in the first place. There’s a million jobs out there that don’t require handling birth control. Pharmacist is basically the only one that does require it. Horse manure. Does it follow then that… Why be a roofer if you only want to do tile roofs and no shingle roofs? Why be a professional golfer if you don’t want to play in Europe? Why be cross-country trucker if you just want to haul gravel and not gasoline? Being Catholic is not a barrier for career in being a pharmacist. That would be discrimination. Why should he/she conform to your needs that happen to be against his/her beliefs? Just go and find another pharmacist in the phone book. They miss a sale and you find a pharmacist that can fill your prescription without that over the counter awkwardness of being refused. No skin off each other’s back if you do 5 minutes of homework before getting into that situation. > [@](#): > > I think that if they’re going to refuse to hand out certain meds, the law should state that there always has to be a second pharmacist on hand during their shift, and the pharmacist in question should have to wear a big sign on their chest stating they don’t deal with birth control, and that they should ask the other pharmacist about it. Seems fair to me–anti-birth control guy gets to work and women aren’t inconvenienced. Of course, I don’t think many pharmacies would be willing to hire two pharmacists to fill what’s basically the same position. Psssst. That second pharmacist is in the phone book at another store. No big signs necessary and inconvenience is totally avoided by both parties. And you are right, two pharmacists in the same building is a waste unless it’s a big operation. The phone book is your friend. ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/83 "2004-11-25T06:01:06Z")
> [@Fuji Kitakyusho](#): > > I’m a bit perplexed that pharmacists are not required to adhere to a professional code of ethics or standards - something along the lines of “I promise to do my @#$%ing job, or else I’ll find a more suitable career.” Whose professional code of “ethics” or “standards” are you expecting? Yours? They vary from person to person, state to state, country to country. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/84 "2004-11-25T06:13:17Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > In industries that provide essential goods and services, it’s fairly normal for the state to heavily regulate what they can and can’t do, as, even though these companies might be privately owned, the general public has a strong interest in what they do. What does that mean? “Interest” is extremely vauge. > [@](#): > > So the obvious answer is to just make sure that the existing drugstores don’t erratically refuse to provide thier services or do other things which may make it difficult for people to get medications. It’s better for the drug stores, better for the public and far less of a pain in the butt for the consumer. If this is really in the public interest, then the public can pay for it rather than forcing individuals to bear the entire cost themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/85 "2004-11-25T06:17:27Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I suppose it would depend largely on the wording of the law. I can see something analogous to “conscientious objector” status in matters like this. If someone wants to conscientious object to doing something, no one is forcing them to work at a particular pharmacy. > [@](#): > > It could also be analogized to not being able to fire Orthodox Jews who refuse to work on the Sabbath. I believe there can be “reasonable accomodations” made to allow people to obey their consciences. Sure, there can: but why should we force business to make these accomodations when the objections prevent the business from performing a basic profit function? At least Jews can simply reschedule to work on different days. People who think birth control magically explodes babies can’t sell the company’s product any day of the week. The business is thus perfectly correct in suggesting that they find a line of work more suited to their own desires and morals. Heck, they can start their own pharmacy and run it any way they want. ---
**Author:** ![davenportavenger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f8ce5/32.png) [@davenportavenger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davenportavenger)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/86 "2004-11-25T06:26:30Z")
> [@Yeticus Rex](#): > > Why should he/she conform to your needs that happen to be against his/her beliefs? Because it’s his/her job. Say I’m a science teacher, who also happens to be a creationist. The school district I work for says that we’re teaching the theory of evolution. I refuse to teach evolution, because it goes against my beliefs. Would I be right to deny my students the chance to learn about evolution? Especially when the school district requires me to teach evolution? Or to use one of the examples you supplied–if a trucker was hired with the provision that he’ll transport anything, and refuses to transport something because he’s opposed to it (such as a person morally opposed to alcohol transporting beer), he’d find himself out of a job. Wouldn’t it be right to fire him, and say he’s a poor truck driver? Especially if, early in his career, he signed a contract stating “I’ll transport anything”? > [@](#): > > Just go and find another pharmacist in the phone book. > Psssst. That second pharmacist is in the phone book at another store. No big signs necessary and inconvenience is totally avoided by both parties. And you are right, two pharmacists in the same building is a waste unless it’s a big operation. > > The phone book is your friend. Many people live in an area that is only serviced by one pharmacy, and cannot travel far due to a lack of transportation. And what if the second pharmacist is also morally opposed to birth control? ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/87 "2004-11-25T06:44:48Z")
What I want to know is, why would a strict Catholic even want to work as a pharmacist, knowing they’re going to have to dispense birth control at some point during their lives? [/QUOTE] Maybe he’s been a pharmacist for 45 years, since long before the morning after pill was available. But what if he’s not. He’s chosen to be a pharmacist and if he can find a place that will continue to employ him even if he makes ethical judgements about what he will and will not dispense, that’s truly none of your concern. As far as those who throw out the scenario where it’s the only pharmacy in town and the person seeking the prescription doesn’t have a car, get real. To what miniscule percentage of the population does this apply? Why not just suppose that it is the only pharmacy in town, that the pharmacist is the only one they emply, that the person seeking the scrip did have a car but their radiator burst on the way to the pharmacy, and they are unable to get a ride as they are a deaf-mute who can’t call a friend to tell them they need a ride. For a slight change of pace, let’s talk about McDonalds. They have hamburgers. We’ve seen 'em. We know the bastards have 'em. But it’s only 10:00 a.m. They refuse to sell it to me! What the hell? How dare the judgemental f\*ckers cast upon me their determination of what the hell I should have for breakfast??? This should be illegal! I mean, we know they have 'em. They are licensed to operate a restaurant by the municipality (business license) and the state (whatever the local food inspection agency would be called). They should be required AS AGENTS OF THE STATE to sell me a goddam Big Fucking Mac. Um…or not. ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/88 "2004-11-25T06:46:33Z")
Oops. Coding error. Above first sentence a quote attributable to **continuity eror**. ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/89 "2004-11-25T06:50:34Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > Or to use one of the examples you supplied–if a trucker was hired with the provision that he’ll transport anything, and refuses to transport something because he’s opposed to it (such as a person morally opposed to alcohol transporting beer), he’d find himself out of a job. Wouldn’t it be right to fire him, and say he’s a poor truck driver? Especially if, early in his career, he signed a contract stating “I’ll transport anything”? Sure it’d be a right. Especially\* if, early in his career, he signed a contract stating "I’ll transport anything. But what if the employer doesn’t mind. What if they employer says, “oh, you don’t want to haul sulfur on religious grounds? That’s OK. Jim will do it. How bout you take this load of watermelons instead.” Then what? Will you demand his dismissal? You are clearly missing that point that HIS BOSS DOESN’T CARE! ---
**Author:** ![Standup\_Karmic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ac91a4/32.png) [@Standup\_Karmic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Standup_Karmic)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/90 "2004-11-25T06:51:47Z")
Wow…three beer and I can no longer code to save my life. Many pardons. Henceforth, I shall refrain from posting after consumption of alcoholic beverages. Or else use preview. Yeah, maybe I’ll preview. ---
**Author:** ![davenportavenger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f8ce5/32.png) [@davenportavenger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davenportavenger)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/91 "2004-11-25T06:54:02Z")
> [@Standup Karmic](#): > > that’s truly none of your concern. It is if it’s my prescription. > [@](#): > > To what miniscule percentage of the population does this apply? Why not just suppose that it is the only pharmacy in town, that the pharmacist is the only one they emply, that the person seeking the scrip did have a car but their radiator burst on the way to the pharmacy, and they are unable to get a ride as they are a deaf-mute who can’t call a friend to tell them they need a ride. I live in a town with only one pharmacy. I can’t drive. If I was a minor, and my parents were also strict Catholics, and I didn’t have any driving friends, I’d be SOL. There may not be a high number of non-drivers who live in one-pharmacy towns with unsympathetic parents and friends, but I believe there has to be someone out there fitting that description. > [@](#): > > For a slight change of pace, let’s talk about McDonalds. They have hamburgers. We’ve seen 'em. We know the bastards have 'em. But it’s only 10:00 a.m. They refuse to sell it to me! What the hell? Actually, McDonald’s restaurants do not start defrosting their meat and setting up the burger station until the end of breakfast. So during that time, the Big Macs are unavailable. If they had Big Macs just sitting out on the counter, but refused to sell them until a certain time, then you’d have a point. Although I do think the decisions of people in the medical profession carry just a tiny bit more weight than the decisions of burger flippers. ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/92 "2004-11-25T07:13:06Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > Because it’s his/her job. > > Say I’m a science teacher, who also happens to be a creationist. The school district I work for says that we’re teaching the theory of evolution. I refuse to teach evolution, because it goes against my beliefs. Would I be right to deny my students the chance to learn about evolution? Especially when the school district requires me to teach evolution? Schools are governmental facilites and state run curriculums…different ball of wax. Most pharmacists are not tangled with state run pharmacies except in state/county ran clinics…but not private pharmacies/clinics. Big difference. > [@](#): > > Or to use one of the examples you supplied–if a trucker was hired with the provision that he’ll transport anything, and refuses to transport something because he’s opposed to it (such as a person morally opposed to alcohol transporting beer), he’d find himself out of a job. Wouldn’t it be right to fire him, and say he’s a poor truck driver? Especially if, early in his career, he signed a contract stating “I’ll transport anything”? He would be fired for insubordination, but not for being a poor truck driver (although it was you who inserted this “provision” to create your POV). He might as well run his own trucking business at that point. I realize you are approaching this issue as if the pharmacist/truck drivers are employees of “The Man”. I see them as self-employed with the freedom to do what jobs they want to do or refuse. Be your own boss and make your own rules. I did. And in this case, “The Man” had no problem with it. > [@](#): > > Many people live in an area that is only serviced by one pharmacy, and cannot travel far due to a lack of transportation. And what if the second pharmacist is also morally opposed to birth control? Mail order and Fed-Ex it. Better yet, plan for an emergency and put it in your emergency kit. Because you know, #3 through #8,329 pharmacists will probably be morally opposed to birth control too. :rolleyes: Damn, am I the only one who has the answers around here? ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/93 "2004-11-25T07:16:54Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > It is if it’s my prescription. Your prescription is _your_ problem, and _your_ business. If you want your prescription filled when the pharmacy is closed, then your perscription is _not_ their business, or their problem. You cannot demand that they open their doors to cater to you. And as the law stands, they don’t _have_ to employ someone who will fill any or all prescriptions, and if they don’t have to, they don’t have to. > [@](#): > > I live in a town with only one pharmacy. I can’t drive. If I was a minor, and my parents were also strict Catholics, and I didn’t have any driving friends, I’d be SOL. That’s true. And the local pharmacy, if they want to run an effective business, would probably try to find an pharmacist who would dispense _anything_. But should they _have_ to? Or, what if you live in West Dog Patch which has a high Catholic population, and is in a very isolated area. The local pharmacy simply _cannot_ find (or afford) a pharmacist who is willing to dispense all drugs, so they’re stuck with the guy who will dispense everything but birth control. What should the pharmacy do? Go out of business? Get in another business? Then there will be _no_ pharmacy in town. How is that better? > [@](#): > > Actually, McDonald’s restaurants do not start defrosting their meat and setting up the burger station until the end of breakfast. So during that time, the Big Macs are unavailable. So let’s say it’s 10 minutes before Big Macs are “officially” available, but everything’s already thawed, theoretically, Big Macs could be prepared and sold. Does McDonald’s have a right to say, “Sorry, not the right time yet, we won’t sell you a Big Mac,” or should they be forced to sell them since they are now available? > [@Apos](#): > > The business is thus perfectly correct in suggesting that they find a line of work more suited to their own desires and morals. Heck, they can start their own pharmacy and run it any way they want. Exactly. They can start their _own_ pharamcy. Do you, continuity error, think that people have a _right_ to start their _own_ business (a pharmacy) and sell, or not sell, what they want? While I think it’s a better idea (business-wise) to employ a pharamcist who is willing to dispense, for instance, birth control, there’s obviously a history in the pharmacy business of not _forcing_ a pharmacist to sell something that goes against his or her conscience, and there’s obviously a reason for that. ---
**Author:** ![Uncommon\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Uncommon\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncommon_Sense)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/94 "2004-11-25T07:18:33Z")
Not all drugs are equal. Some of you are suggesting that by your logic or lack thereof. A life saving scrip will not be rejected by the pharmacist. A birth control type drug may. They’re not the same. Again, it would be similar to asking a general practitioner to perform a type of surgery that he morally objected to, like an abortion, or even just writing the prescription for RU486. Not all doctors will write that scrip. Does that mean you have a problem with them?? Just because a doctor wrote a scrip for a drug he decided to prescribe does not mean there has to be a pharmacist on the recieving end to fill it. What if the doc wrote a scrip for a left-handed cigarette for someone with glaucoma, does that mean that every pharmacist has to deliver the goods? ---
**Author:** ![Yeticus\_Rex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a698b9/32.png) [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/95 "2004-11-25T07:24:42Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > It is if it’s my prescription. If you own the business, you can direct what it can and can’t sell, not the customer. They can _request_ a certain item, not demand it. Or they can seek it elsewhere. > [@](#): > > I live in a town with only one pharmacy. I can’t drive. If I was a minor, and my parents were also strict Catholics, and I didn’t have any driving friends, I’d be SOL. There may not be a high number of non-drivers who live in one-pharmacy towns with unsympathetic parents and friends, but I believe there has to be someone out there fitting that description. Dem the breaks. I grew up in a small town, with no ice rink, no pineapples, and no Cheech and Chong records. Should I blame every business that didn’t/refuse to sell/provide them? How dare they! What about my needs? SOOL again. Been there, done that. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/96 "2004-11-25T07:30:43Z")
> [@Uncommon Sense](#): > > Not all drugs are equal. Some of you are suggesting that by your logic or lack thereof. A life saving scrip will not be rejected by the pharmacist. A birth control type drug may. They’re not the same. What’s problematic here is that pharmicists aren’t relaly qualified to make medical decisions. And the pill is prescribed for a lot more uses than just birth control. As I noted, for many women it can prevent serious pain and complications when it comes to mensturation. > [@](#): > > What if the doc wrote a scrip for a left-handed cigarette for someone with glaucoma, does that mean that every pharmacist has to deliver the goods? No. But as I noted before, pharmacists are acredited: more like a guild system than an interchangeable cashier. They also have the right, just like the individual and the store, to strip someone of their liscence if they feel they are not living up to the standards of the profession, however they interpret these standards. ---
**Author:** ![Uncommon\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Uncommon\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncommon_Sense)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/97 "2004-11-25T07:49:16Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > What’s problematic here is that pharmicists aren’t relaly qualified to make medical decisions. The hell they’re not! They are most definitely qualified to make any and all medical decisions related to the drug they are being asked to fill. They must know all manner of drug interaction and physiology of the human body and how it functions. They are there as the last line of defense in cases where scrips are mis-typed, where patients are confused, where docs make mistkes and so-forth. Seven years of college aint no laughing matter. They know more about the drug they are filling then the doc who prescribed it. Guaranteed. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/98 "2004-11-25T11:06:20Z")
> [@](#): > > The hell they’re not! > They are most definitely qualified to make any and all medical decisions related to the drug they are being asked to fill. No, they are not. Making medical decisions is not the same thing as knowing drug interactions, which is only part of making the decision to prescribe a drug to a patient and treating disease. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/99 "2004-11-25T11:40:04Z")
For those of you who believe that pharmacists have no right to refuse service, I ask one question. Should a customer have the right to go into a pharmcacy and buy 100 maximum strength sleeping pills, 100 maximum strength pain killers, 100 tranquilizers and a bottle of Nyquil to wash it all down with? Or should he refuse service on the grounds that the customer might just be suicidal? Are there no limits whatsoever? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2004, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453/100 "2004-11-25T14:50:49Z")
> [@Dog80](#): > > Who’s going to be more un-happy, a rape victim with an unwanted pregnancy or a pharmacist with hurt feelings? Sorry, that’s not what you were suggesting. You asserted that everyone would be happy. Doesn’t need to be a major point, but that’s what you said, and that’s what I responded to. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-pharmacist-refuses-to-sell-morning-after-pill-should-he-have-that-choice/276453.md?page=6)