# 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:** 9
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/161 "2010-03-30T01:57:14Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Ok, my key question. Thanks for answering although I’m surprised that you (and many others) would prefer no service to incomplete service. You are deliberately misrepresenting my answer. I’m not saying no service is better than incomplete service; I’m saying your hypothetical would not occur and is therefore irrelevant. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/162 "2010-03-30T02:27:57Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > No, it’s completely irrelevent, because nobody gives a crap if Carl Catholic runs a pharmacy. They only care that _somebody_ is running one - and somebody _will_, even if it comes down to some mail-order internet service or a government-run office, because the demand that prescriptions be filled is considerably higher than you apparently think it is, if you think that whole communities would shrug and say, “Well, if Carl’s not running the shop, I guess we don’t get our heart pills then.” > > What you have here is a red herring, a hollow threat - “If you don’t let Carl Catholic run pharmacies _his_ way, you ain’t gonna get no pills!” Yeah, like the conservatives are going to let _that_ happen. :rolleyes: Can you show any cite showing how much of a pharmacy’s business is contraception? Your herring is much redder. It’s not “his way” because he just won’t stock one set of items. It’s not like he wants to sell morphine to minors. Shouldn’t a community decide wether heart pills outrank condoms? They shouldn’t shrug, they should act like adults and decide what’s best for them and accept any consecuences. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Try “prefers no service to potentially dangerous service”. Medicine requires trust; if I take medicine from some stranger, I insist that he be the sort who won’t let his fantasies dictate what he hands out. I don’t want to accept medicine that I have no way of testing from someone who regards his job as a tool to punish sinners. I wouldn’t want someone like that to be involved in anything that requires that I trust him. “Potentially dangerous” is so wrong that does not merit an answer. Really, your “medicine from a stranger” is a sorry attempt at sympathy. I want the guy to hand me the medicine I asked, and if I don’t like his business model I’ll go someplace else. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You are deliberately misrepresenting my answer. I’m not saying no service is better than incomplete service; I’m saying your hypothetical would not occur and is therefore irrelevant. What’s so difficult to believe? I guy not wanting to do business if thelaw changes? ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/163 "2010-03-30T02:42:05Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Yes, it is a fact. People expect all normal pharmacies to carry standard items like contraceptives. That’s not a fact, it’s a common practice but it isn’t determinative. Point me to the legal definition of a pharmacy that dictates what they must sell. > [@](#): > > It comes down to reason, if there is a legitimate reason such as no demand for an item, then by all means, don’t carry or sell it. IMO, personal moral objections by the pharmacist or owner is a legitimate reason. I may not agree with it, but I don’t see how it is illegal or should be illegal. I don’t see a problem with a Dr not wanting to perform an operation such as an abortion, or a pharmacist not wanting to distribute types of contraception. Individuals still have the right to make moral objections regardless of their professions. I have yet to see a compelling case that this particular issue rises to the point where we as a society should compel their behavior. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/164 "2010-03-30T03:03:58Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > “Potentially dangerous” is so wrong that does not merit an answer. In other words, your position is indefensible. The Right on this board really does seem to like this “You are not _worthy_ to debate me!” dodge. > [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Really, your “medicine from a stranger” is a sorry attempt at sympathy. I want the guy to hand me the medicine I asked, and if I don’t like his business model I’ll go someplace else. And if there is no other place available? You’d do great as a defender of segregation; those black people can just go somewhere else, right? ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/165 "2010-03-30T03:37:57Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > In other words, your position is indefensible. The Right on this board really does seem to like this “You are not _worthy_ to debate me!” dodge. > > And if there is no other place available? You’d do great as a defender of segregation; those black people can just go somewhere else, right? OK, you win. Saying that it is “potentially dangerous” is a sorry spin to try to bolster a silly position based on stubborness. You’re worthy to debate me (well, that no merit), you ideas however a laughable and silly. Yeah, the “you’re really a racist” bit, always close to the heart of those who are not winning a debate. It shows a gigantic gap in cerebral function to compare not selling a product to not selling a product to a person because of his race. Is that all you got? Whinning “you’re a stoopid wingnut” and “you’re a racist”? Well, on the other hand, that’s all you got in all debates. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/166 "2010-03-30T14:03:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > One freedom does not cancel out another. There is no freedom to force a store owner what to stock. We license and regulate food but we don’t dictate that Jewish or Islamic markets carry pork. True - we **don’t** dictate that Kosher and Halal butchers carry pork. But I think you can realize that not doing something is different to not being able to do it. For the record, I don’t think we could require butchers to carry pork as a condition of their licensing/regulation - there isn’t a government public interest at stake, and the effects are much greater (the place is no longer kosher/halal). But what you have failed to explain is where the difference lies between telling a pharmacist that his religious beliefs that he should not serve African Americans are not to be respected, while his religious beliefs that he should not provide contraceptives should be. It just isn’t enough to say that one is requiring him to stock something, and the other isn’t. You have to explain why that makes a difference. In the end, I think you will come down to saying the state interest in ensuring the provision of contraception isn’t strong enough to overcome the infringement on religious freedom. That’s a legitimate argument, though not one I agree with. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/167 "2010-03-30T14:06:57Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > OK, you win. Saying that it is “potentially dangerous” is a sorry spin to try to bolster a silly position based on stubborness. Because of course pharmacies are in no way involved with health issues, right? :rolleyes: > [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Yeah, the “you’re really a racist” bit, always close to the heart of those who are not winning a debate. It shows a gigantic gap in cerebral function to compare not selling a product to not selling a product to a person because of his race. > Is that all you got? Whinning “you’re a stoopid wingnut” and “you’re a racist”? Is all you got? Distorting what people say? I never said you were a racist; I was pointing out that you were using the kind of logic used to defend racism. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/168 "2010-03-30T14:13:59Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > None at all. A person who is willing to put their religion above the needs of the customer is not someone who should be dispensing drugs. It’s a small step from refusing care for religious reason, to sabotaging that care in other ways. I wouldn’t trust such a person not to replace medicine with placebos because God told them. > > As I said; they should not only not be permitted to run a pharmacy, they should be banned from any aspect of medical care. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > if I take medicine from some stranger, I insist that he be the sort who won’t let his fantasies dictate what he hands out. I don’t want to accept medicine that I have no way of testing from someone who regards his job as a tool to punish sinners. I wouldn’t want someone like that to be involved in anything that requires that I trust him. You’re utterly and completely incapable of having a rational discussion of any subject that touches religion, aren’t you? That’s really sad. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/169 "2010-03-30T14:16:12Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > You’re utterly and completely incapable of having a rational discussion of any subject that touches religion, aren’t you? That’s really sad. Oh, please. We are, specifically, talking about people willing to impose their religion on others. These aren’t innocent people bothering no one else. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/170 "2010-03-30T14:20:20Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Oh, please. We are, specifically, talking about people willing to impose their religion on others. These aren’t innocent people bothering no one else. No, we’re not talking about that at all, we’re talking about you infringing on others’ religion by mandating that their business provide certain products that they don’t want to provide, when such products are easily available elsewhere. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/171 "2010-03-30T14:35:17Z")
Wow, I just checked this thread and am amazed at how it is doing. For the record, I think **Der Trihs** has a point, religious people should not be allowed to inflict their opinions on others in a place of business. If they choose to campaign against contraception in their own time then that’s up to them, but it has no place at work. As for **Skammer** ’s point about alternatives being easily available, well that is not true in all cases. Plenty of people here in the UK, myself included, live in rural communities where there is only one chemist, I’m sure in the US people can be even more isolated. There are plenty of people who can’t necessarily travel to the next town/city to obtain medicine that someone has decided is against their moral code to sell. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/172 "2010-03-30T14:54:30Z")
Refusing to sell somthing =! imposing my religion on you. If I refused to sell it _to you_, but sold it to others, that’d be discriminatory and wrong. But if I don’t want to carry that product – for whatever reason; it doesn’t have to be religion – too bad for you. Go somewhere else or open your own damn pharmacy. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/173 "2010-03-30T14:55:39Z")
> [@Walker\_in\_Eternity](#): > > If they choose to campaign against contraception in their own time then that’s up to them, but it has no place at work. And, as many folks in this thread have said, there’s no reason for that restriction unless there is a compelling public interest in doing so. And honest people don’t agree on whether there is one. It’s up to the pharmacist and his/her employer in absence of a regulatory mandate. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/174 "2010-03-30T15:00:26Z")
The POINT of the links in the OP were NOT about CVS or Rite Aid corporation refusing to carry certain items at all. They were about EMPLOYEES at these pharmacies who took it upon themselves to not sell them. That’s what the OP was talking about. let’s get back to that. My answer is still the same - you don’t wanna do the job there, get another job, mister EMPLOYEE. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/175 "2010-03-30T15:08:59Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Still, nobody answers the key question: Better to have a pharmacy with no condoms or no pharmacy at all? If the only thing you ever need at the pharmacy is condoms, it works out to the exact same thing, now doesn’t it? And that’s the situation for millions of people–they’re young, they’re healthy, and if they had outie bits instead of innie bits they wouldn’t be on any prescription medications at all. For them, it’s no damn benefit at all to have a pharmacy up the street if it doesn’t stock the one medication they need, or allows the jackass who works the evening shift (when they’re off and can actually pick up their medication) to refuse to sell to them. And if you ask the diabetic if it’s better to have a Hindu-owned pharmacy with no bovine-derived insulin or no pharmacy at all, you’d get the same answer–that practically speaking it’s the same damn thing. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/176 "2010-03-30T15:15:12Z")
> [@CrazyCatLady](#): > > If the only thing you ever need at the pharmacy is condoms, it works out to the exact same thing, now doesn’t it? It’s also somewhat disingenuous for those supporting the “right” of pharmacists not to fill certain prescriptions to talk about condoms. Condoms are not at issue here, as they are over the counter products that can be sold anywhere. Of course, it serves their purpose as they crate an image of generally available items. And it allows them to bypass the argument that the number of pharmacists is limited by a strict government regulation process. ---
**Author:** ![Cumberdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8c91f0/32.png) [@Cumberdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cumberdale)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/177 "2010-03-30T15:18:40Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Refusing to sell somthing =! imposing my religion on you. > > If I refused to sell it _to you_, but sold it to others, that’d be discriminatory and wrong. But if I don’t want to carry that product – for whatever reason; it doesn’t have to be religion – too bad for you. Go somewhere else or open your own damn pharmacy. No, if you are not willing to do your job because some superstition says so, then you need to find something else to do. Selling contraception is part of a pharmacists duty. ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/178 "2010-03-30T15:45:44Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > The POINT of the links in the OP were NOT about CVS or Rite Aid corporation refusing to carry certain items at all. They were about EMPLOYEES at these pharmacies who took it upon themselves to not sell them. That’s what the OP was talking about. let’s get back to that. My answer is still the same - you don’t wanna do the job there, get another job, mister EMPLOYEE. I have no problem with this. If I work at CVS, I’d better be willing to sell whatever they ask me to. _If_ they have a policy that allows employees to refuse to fill certain prescriptions, that’s up to them; but they are under no obligation to make that accommodation. > [@Cumberdale](#): > > Selling contraception is part of a pharmacists duty. Says who? Is it a requirement of licensing? ---
**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:** [March 30, 2010, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/179 "2010-03-30T16:12:34Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Because of course pharmacies are in no way involved with health issues, right? :rolleyes: > > Is all you got? Distorting what people say? I never said you were a racist; I was pointing out that you were using the kind of logic used to defend racism. I got more, but, why use my Battle Axe +4 when my Dagger is more than enough? I get than I’m not a racist, I’m only as stupid as one, thanks. > [@SteveG1](#): > > The POINT of the links in the OP were NOT about CVS or Rite Aid corporation refusing to carry certain items at all. They were about EMPLOYEES at these pharmacies who took it upon themselves to not sell them. That’s what the OP was talking about. let’s get back to that. My answer is still the same - you don’t wanna do the job there, get another job, mister EMPLOYEE. As I’ve said before, if the employee doesn’t follow his boss’s order, buh-bye…even if I thought the employee was morally right. > [@CrazyCatLady](#): > > If the only thing you ever need at the pharmacy is condoms, it works out to the exact same thing, now doesn’t it? > > And that’s the situation for millions of people–they’re young, they’re healthy, and if they had outie bits instead of innie bits they wouldn’t be on any prescription medications at all. For them, it’s no damn benefit at all to have a pharmacy up the street if it doesn’t stock the one medication they need, or allows the jackass who works the evening shift (when they’re off and can actually pick up their medication) to refuse to sell to them. > > And if you ask the diabetic if it’s better to have a Hindu-owned pharmacy with no bovine-derived insulin or no pharmacy at all, you’d get the same answer–that practically speaking it’s the same damn thing. You’d be putting pharmacies at the need of carrying everything every client might need (I know that contraceptives are not esoteric meds). However, to say that there is NO benefit is stretching it. I suffer for migraine and take some OTC pills for it. A pharmacy that doesn’t carry them will not see me as a client as much, but it’s not like I only need migraine pills. Wouldn’t the diabetic go to the Hindu pharmacy for aspirin? Preparation H? Kleenex? The jackass IS a jackass. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2010, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859/180 "2010-03-30T16:13:57Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Says who? Is it a requirement of licensing? The government controls (a) which products require a prescription; and (b) who is permitted to fill prescriptions. It therefore doesn’t seem unreasonable that the government should limit the license to fill a prescription to those people willing to fill prescriptions. It’s not a radical concept. If a product is freely available over the counter, I wouldn’t suggest making it a requirement of licensing that a store carry it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pharmacy-and-religion/533859.md?page=10)