# Pharmacy and Religion **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 26, 2010, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859 "2010-03-26T10:54:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/381 "2010-04-01T00:11:05Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > What’s the science on reading for comprehension? The complaint was that their reason for refusing to sell was based on scientific ignorance, on _top_ of an aversion to chemical abortion. The statement was that if they weren’t compounding religious foolishness with scientific foolishness, their choice to withhold sales wouldn’t be so annoying. **Obviously** , comments on how they have a right to sell stuff have no bearing whatsoever on the complaint of how stupid they’re being in doing so. > > That said, I think she was giving these people too much credit. I think most of them oppose contraception because they want to control other people’s behavior - I think that not wanting to aid and abett abortion has little to do with it. They don’t want to support/permit the perceived-as-slutty _lifestyle_. > > Which is why I see it as being about as morally defensible a position as wanting to force people to go to church against their will. Heck, I personally could accept a first-amendment argument _against_ them - they are using a government-licenced position to restrict and oppose lifestyles contraindicated by their religion; they are using their government-licenced position to enforce the policies of their religion on their customers. And this is legal now? It is called language teaching. In the case of Catholicism the position against contraceptives is not based in scientific misunderstandings, it is based on moral reasons. You can say that the morals are wrong and that the religion is superstition, but you are wrong in saying it is based or incorrect information. The opposition in not based on the specific mechanism (which, if it were abortifacient would strenghthen the case but not make it) but on the simle fact that it prevents conception. I cannot speak for others, for Catholics it has nothing to do with perceived or real sluttiness. They are using their licensed position to comply with the law. How does providing a service impose morality? Do they force people to go to church or pray the rosary? i could see your point if that specific license would forbi others from getting one. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The other groups in question are gone, or changed drastically. The US government doesn’t follow the law of the Roman empire, nor is it a continuation of the RE; so the Roman Empire’s behavior has nothing to do with it. But Christianity has a consistent 2000+ year history of being against women. > > In other words, I’m right so you’ll try to distract from that by calling me a “one trick pony” instead of arguing. Your singling out Christiaity as an oppresor of wmen flies in the face that basically every civilization has practised what you would call oppression. In the same words, you are a one-trick pony. The same answer for all threads, plus the whinning of course. ---
**Author:** ![Hirka\_T\_Bawa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/db5fbb/32.png) [@Hirka\_T\_Bawa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hirka_T_Bawa)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/382 "2010-04-01T00:32:44Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > How does this compare with OTC meds, especially ones with lots of warnings like cold or allergy meds? The list I posted previously had a total of 59 interaction warnings, since I don’t know what cold or allergy medication you are specifying, I looked up the first ones I thought of, Diphenhydramine (Benadryl), and Psuedoephedrine (Sudafed). Diphenhydramine had a total of 6 interactions listed, while psuedoephedrine had 3 interactions, but 15 contraindications (mostly in the form of MAOI’s, which is on the label)… So combined, these two drugs still had less then hormonal BCPs. If you want me to post the actual list, I can. Or, if you had other drugs in mind, just let me know what they are. Please note, the interactions I’ve listed for all the drugs is not the complete list, only the most serious ones, which is the case for the BCPs and the allergy and cold medications. I’m being as objective as I can, with no internal bias expressed, which is what everyone in my profession should be doing. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/383 "2010-04-01T00:39:07Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well, to be fair, you only asked for two examples. Next time ask for three examples. No. > [@Bricker](#): > > Really? > > Can you name two **other** cases? (emphasis added) Perhaps you could be even fairer now. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/384 "2010-04-01T02:13:27Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Your singling out Christiaity as an oppresor of wmen flies in the face that basically every civilization has practised what you would call oppression. Nonsense. Again, you ignore the fact that those “civilizations” are either dead or changed. Christianity is still overwhelmingly misogynistic. And you are also ignoring the fact that the motivation and excuse of these people for persecuting women is specifically religious. > [@](#): > > In the same words, you are a one-trick pony. The same answer for all threads, plus the whinning of course. Well, forgive me for bringing up religion in a thread titled “Pharmacy and Religion”. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/385 "2010-04-01T03:36:19Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Nonsense. Again, you ignore the fact that those “civilizations” are either dead or changed. Christianity is still overwhelmingly misogynistic. And you are also ignoring the fact that the motivation and excuse of these people for persecuting women is specifically religious. > > Well, forgive me for bringing up religion in a thread titled “Pharmacy and Religion”. :rolleyes: Maybe persecuting means something different in your dictionary. I’m oppressing women right now!!! I’m not selling them any contraception!!! You wish bringing up religion was your one-trick ponery, you wish. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/386 "2010-04-01T04:41:40Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Maybe persecuting means something different in your dictionary. I’m oppressing women right now!!! I’m not selling them any contraception!!! Is it your job to do so? Are you the gatekeeper for their contraception? If not, then you aren’t; but pharmacists are. In the name of religion, these pharmacists are using a position of legal privilege to harass women and deny them something they want and need; that’s religious persecution. > [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > You wish bringing up religion was your one-trick ponery, you wish. I wish you were willing to actually argue instead of making such carefully vague insults. ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/387 "2010-04-01T07:55:28Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I don’t know but that how the line would be drawn in theory and greater minds than mine would have to figure out how that worked but IIRC any therapeutic use is “off label” usage and is most commonly prescribed to younger girls (I think it might have something to do with puberty). Therapeutic use is not really very common from what I can tell. “From what you can tell”??? How much do you actually know about this subject? I think you greatly underestimate how _extremely common_ those conditions are. I’m a nursing student and I’m currently doing a clinical rotation on a gynecology surgery unit. It’s shocking even to me how common many gynecological disorders are - most people don’t talk about them much, especially if they’re “mild” enough to only require treatment with medication and don’t need more treatment such as surgery. [Non-contraceptive uses of the combined oral contraceptive pill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_oral_contraceptive_pill#Non-contraceptive_uses) (estrogen and progesterone) include polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, adenomyosis, anemia related to menstruation, dysmenorrhea (painful menstruation), mild or moderate acne, irregular menstrual cycles, and dysfunctional uterine bleeding. [ul][li][Polycystic ovary syndrome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycystic_ovary_syndrome) affects 5 to 10% of women of reproductive age[/li][li][Endometriosis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endometriosis) affects 5 to 10% of women[/li][li][Adenomyosis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenomyosis) can be linked to endometriosis, is associated with any uterine trauma (pregnancy, c-section, tubal ligation, pregnancy termination)[/li][li][Dysmenorrhea](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysmenorrhea) is more common in young women (some studies say more than half of women), and it often decreases with age or after bearing children, but not always[/li][/ul] I know many women taking oral contraceptives, and I’d say that a _large_ minority of those I know are taking it primarily for medical reasons. I’m 30 years old and I’ve been taking it for 7 years for medical reasons (long irregular cycles and [menorrhagia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menorrhagia)). Possibly TMI, but my menorrhagia (prolonged heavy bleeding) included periods of many months of continuous moderate bleeding, including a couple weeks of continuous _heavy_ bleeding eventually requiring surgery. Oral contraceptives keep that from reoccuring. ---
**Author:** ![Walker\_in\_Eternity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/46a35a/32.png) [@Walker\_in\_Eternity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walker_in_Eternity)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/388 "2010-04-01T07:59:32Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The Supreme Court found law restricting the sale of birth control pills unconstitutional (at least with respect to married women) in 1965. The same rule was not extended to unmarried women until 1972. It has been the single most important factor in liberating women that I can think of and I understand why women would want to defend their access to it but there is not a single place in the United States where you cannot get the pill regulrly mailed to you so what is the real issue here? Well for starters, I don’t live in the US and my OP was about chemists in the UK. I’m not sure medication is sent out by post here. It has been very interesting to learn that the same battles are being fought on your side of the Atlantic as well as ours. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/389 "2010-04-01T12:55:47Z")
> [@Hirka\_T\_Bawa](#): > > Oh, and **Der Trihs** , your comments show a total lack of respect for the profession of pharmacy, not just the pharmacists who abuse their power. Pharmacists are a check on a doctor’s prescribing power, doctors only have the equivalent of one semester of pharmacology during medical school, while pharmacists have 4 years. This is a misleading statement. Beyond basic coursework in pharmacology, physicians have continuing training and experience through medical school, residency, fellowships and years of clinical practice in dealing with prescription and non-prescription medications, their efficacy and safety, interactions and other issues. That connection with dealing with actual patient problems is something pharmacists do not have (and cannot be expected to have). Just one example was cited earlier - the prescribing of what may look to a pharmacist like birth control pills, but which are intended to treat any of a number of non-birth control-related conditions. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/390 "2010-04-01T12:57:40Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I will stop when you stop saying that pharmacists should just fill any prescription that is handed to them. I haven’t said that. Why not carry on making things up? I am more than in favor of pharmacists having both the right and the duty to refuse to prescribe drugs in certain situations. Just not this one. Just as I am not in favor of them having the right not to prescribe based on the patient’s race. Does that mean I think they are glorified cashiers too? > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > You don’t think that the issue of a doctor refusing to nprescribve birth control pills is relevant to the issue of a pharmacist refusing to fill that prescription? How are the two different other than the whole “well doctors are doctors and pharmacists are only pharmacists” No, I think that regulations for doctors and for pharmacists are different. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/391 "2010-04-01T13:00:33Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The clear lack of respect for pharmacists on this thread is evident. The attitude seems to be, that if I have my prescription and my copay they should just shut up and give me my goddam drugs regardless of how they feel about it. As far as some people on this board are concerned, they might as well be vending machines. You are seeing lack of respect for it because you want to see that. To me, it shows respect for the profession, because it recognizes its importance. Frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass if a barista chooses not to serve a person coffee because they think that person is over-caffeinated, or because that person has an odd haircut. When someone as important as a pharmacist makes that sort of choice, arbitrarily impacting someone else’s life, then I have a problem. Maybe it is you who view pharmacists with a lack of respect? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/392 "2010-04-01T13:13:00Z")
I’m sure most (if not all) pharmacists are aware of therapeutic uses of birth control. I guess we’d have to ask these conscientious objectors if they would object to filling the prescription if the customer said it was for a non-contraceptive use. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/393 "2010-04-01T13:23:10Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well it doesn’t really matter what the states say, the question is whether it is possible to refuse to dispense contraception in the US and the answer seems to be yes. It depends on the state! Some states allow it, some states don’t. Saying it doesn’t matter what the states say confuses me a little, seeing as this is a matter of state law. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > If a state decides to force the dispensation of contraception of all licensed pharmacists regaldless of religious views the question is whether or not that law would survive a lawsuit. I don’t think it would because there probably isn’t sufficient state interest in truncating the first amendment. Well the laws exist. They haven’t been overturned. Find someone to bring the suit against them - it shouldn’t be hard to find a someone willing to screw women over who has standing. Unfortunately there are a lot of them. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > If the state can’t force the dispensation of contraceptives, can the employer fire a pharmacist for refusing to do so. The answer here is less clear. Birth control pills are a pretty big part of what goes on at pharmacies and it is probably not a reasonable accomodation to allow a pharmacist (usually the only pharmacist in the pharmacy) to refuse to dispense what is probably the highest volume item. It depends on the state. Some states you cannot. Again, there are laws on the books of various states about this. I’m not sure how you could read the thread this far and not realize that. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think you can probably fire a pharmacist for refusing to dispense AND not return the prescription. How positively generous of you. Laws requiring pharmacists to dispense contraceptives, and laws protecting the employment of pharmacists who refuse to dispense contraceptives are both on the books in different states. They are both, under the current interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, constitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Walker\_in\_Eternity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/46a35a/32.png) [@Walker\_in\_Eternity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walker_in_Eternity)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/394 "2010-04-01T13:26:38Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I’m sure most (if not all) pharmacists are aware of therapeutic uses of birth control. I guess we’d have to ask these conscientious objectors if they would object to filling the prescription if the customer said it was for a non-contraceptive use. To be honest the use of the drug shouldn’t matter, they should sell the drug irrespective of whether it is used for contraception or therapeutic purposes. If they refuse to sell the drug, sack them and get somone in who will sell it. In this statement I am, of course, referring to those pharmacists employed by chains of stores. If a religious person chooses to open a halal pharmacy as there own business that’s their choice as it is my choice not to purchase from such an organisation. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/395 "2010-04-01T13:30:15Z")
> [@villa](#): > > You are seeing lack of respect for it because you want to see that. To me, it shows respect for the profession, because it recognizes its importance. Frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass if a barista chooses not to serve a person coffee because they think that person is over-caffeinated, or because that person has an odd haircut. When someone as important as a pharmacist makes that sort of choice, arbitrarily impacting someone else’s life, then I have a problem. This represents another key point in the debate. Pharmacists cannot on the one hand say that their expression of religious/moral beliefs in refusing to fill prescriptions is nonconsequential because of availability elsewhere and point to examples of movie rental places and liquor stores being able to sell whatever they want — and simultaneously claim they are vital and critical links in the health care delivery chain. If you’re that important (and there _is_ considerable significance to your role), then accept the responsibilities and legal requirements of your profession. If you don’t think patients should be able to obtain drugs prescribed by their physicians on some sort moral ground, take proper action - lobby the F.D.A. and/or your lawmakers to get those drugs restricted or banned. Don’t think you can arbitrarily allocate those legal powers to yourselves without consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/396 "2010-04-01T13:36:18Z")
> [@](#): > > If they refuse to sell the drug, sack them and get somone in who will sell it. In this statement I am, of course, referring to those pharmacists employed by chains of stores. > > If a religious person chooses to open a halal pharmacy as there own business that’s their choice as it is my choice not to purchase from such an organisation. Well, that’s the point. In the rather protracted discussion of the US situation (ie., pages 2-7) we’ve identified there are two separate issues: whether a pharmacist can be fired by his employer for personally refusing to fill a birth control script; and whether a pharmacy itself can refuse to stock or dispense birth control. The answer to the first seems to be an unqualified yes, although there are a few states which appear to have tried to prevent it. The answer to the latter is a more qualified yes, and the situation is markedly different from that in the UK. In Britain, if your local chemist doesn’t want to fill your prescription, you can go to one across the street. In large swathes of the US, the next closest pharmacy might be hundreds of miles away. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/397 "2010-04-01T13:41:32Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Is it your job to do so? Are you the gatekeeper for their contraception? If not, then you aren’t; but pharmacists are. In the name of religion, these pharmacists are using a position of legal privilege to harass women and deny them something they want and need; that’s religious persecution. > > I wish you were willing to actually argue instead of making such carefully vague insults. “Harass and persecute”. Women have come a long way towards equality if a pharmacist’s not carrying contraceptives is considered harassment and persecution. I always thought religious persecution look more like countries were people are tortured and killed for their religion. The truth is never an insult, not even a carefully vague one. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/398 "2010-04-01T13:49:09Z")
Folks keep saying “it’s the pharmacist’s job to dispense prescriptions, and if he can’t/won’t to that, he should get another job.” That statement is assuming something we have not agreed on. My position is that a self-employed pharmacist’s job is _whatever he_ wants it to be\*, subject to applicable laws and regulations. So, no, he can’t (and should’t be allowed to) put cyanide in you cholersterol medication. But it’s not his “job” to sell any specific type of medication, including contraceptives, if he doesn’t feel like it. It’s simply not a requirement of having a pharmacist’s license (with, apparently, a couple of exceptions for certain states. Which is wrong-headed IMO.) Also, the Catholic church’s objection to contraception has nothing to do with their potential effect as an abortifacient, so it’s not based on “scientific ignorance.” They know what it does and doesn’t do. A condom is not an abortifacient either but our hypothetical RC pharmacist wouldn’t sell those either. \*I want to acknowledge that a lot of pharmacists are women, but I got tired of avoiding pronouns and switching back and forth between ‘he’ and ‘she’ got confusing to read. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/399 "2010-04-01T14:48:25Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Well, yes they should give you your goddamn drugs regardless of how they _feel_ about it. I don’t give a fuck about their feelings. I give a fuck about their professional opinions- I’m glad pharmacists have the right to refuse to fill prescriptions from drug seekers, or because of potentially dangerous interactions- but their personal _religious_ beliefs are their own problem. And so for you the question of whether the first amendement covers the refusal to dispense birth control pills (or abortificants for that matter) is settled. Screw the first amendment, if a doctor says I want it, I can pay for it and a doctor says I can have it then that pharmacist must sell it to me regardless of their beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/400 "2010-04-01T14:51:15Z")
Yes, that’s a perfect _precis_ of my position. I tip my hat to you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859.md?page=21)