Is this imposing your religious beliefs on others

[tabbycat31]

Poll question: Is this imposing your religious beliefs on others

You walk into a pharmacy to have your perscription filled. The pharmacist on duty refuses to fill it on the ground of his/her religious beliefs (such as Catholics with birth control and Scientologists with antidepressants).

By refusing to fill the perscription, is the pharmacist imposing his/her religious beleifs to you?

[Skittles]

1. the pharmacist is not performing his/her job duties

so yes, he/she is imposing their religious crap on me

[Ian David]

3. I bet that same pharmacist would sell cigarettes to a pregnant woman. n/t

[Skittles]

16. and Viagra to her hubby

[Ian David]

2. Do Orthodox Jews who work at The RMV refuse to give drivers' licenses to Christians?

Because you know, Christian drive on Saturday.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Orthodox Jews don't usually take jobs...

that pose a conflict with their religion.

The honorable thing is to quit the job if you can't do it, but that tends to lead to other quandries.

(If I am a prison medic opposed to the death penalty, should I have to quit the job because I am ordered to man the execution needles?)

[unblock]

35. jews don't believe jewish laws apply to non-jews.

there's no problem with goyim driving on shabbat. it's not a matter of not imposing one's religion on another, it's a core part of jewish belief that non-jews are not subject to jewish law.

in fact, some jews get around jewish laws by having goyim to do those things for them (drive, turn lights on, etc.)

[Ian David]

42. But there are also Jews who are against gay marriage for non-Jews.

For example, Brian Camenker, Rebbe Y. A. Korff, and Ben Stein, who find it reasonable to inflict their bigotry on those outside of Judaism.

[unblock]

44. that's their bigotry talking, not their judaism

ben stein is an asshole who just happens to be a jew. i don't know the others. i'll take it from his title that the rebbe actually knows something about judaism, but, well, what can i say, the jewish clergy is not asshole-free, same as any other religion.

point is, some religions have explicit requirements on ALL people; judaism as a religion does not. i'll agree that there are occassional nutjobs and wacko sects that might disagree.

[Sebastian Doyle]

4. Absolutely it is.

The very purpose of a pharmacy is to dispense drugs. If your personal beliefs cause you to have a problem with dispensing prescriptions, you should not do that for a living.

This isn't necessarily limited to religion of course. Myself, I have a problem with pharmaceutical companies as a rule, and believe that a lot of what they distribute is poison, with better natural alternatives available.

But that's why I don't work in a pharmacy. And neither should anyone else that doesn't want to sell prscribed drugs.

[tabbycat31]

9. I agree wtih you

when it comes to the drug companies. I last had a perscription filled in 2002, (which was for pain meds after I had my wisdom teeth pulled). And I completely agree on the natural alternatives.

I used to work at a pharmacy, but it was a chain pharmacy, and I didn't work the pharmacy dept (except as a fill in cashier occasionally. This was before I had objections to the stuff they sell though).

Anotehr comparison would be that if you are a vegan, would you choose to work at a steakhouse?

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. A vegan could work at a steakhouse -

there's nothing that make that person eat a steak because he works there.

But if he refused to serve customers the steaks they order because he is a vegan, he'd be fired for cause.

[hughee99]

5. If the pharmacy fills those prescriptions normally, yes

If the pharmacy policy is not to fill those prescriptions, no (as in no, THE PHARMACIST isn't imposing his/her religious beliefs on you).

[Dangerously Amused]

6. = "my religion prevents me from dispensing your medicine." So, yes.

How could it be argued otherwise?

[flvegan]

7. I want to be the first militant vegan pharmacist.

So I can refuse to fill any perscription that is for any drug/medication that was formulated via animal testing of any kind. That's not imposing my beliefs on anyone, is it? (in case anyone doesn't get it, no I'm not serious)

I actually used that analogy to their belief system on a fundie nutjob that works in my building. Shut her the hell up pretty quickly. They don't like when the pendulum swings.

[Goblinmonger]

31. Or in gelatin-based capsules. n/t

[polichick]

10. Yep - he's got no business doing that. (Both figuratively and literally.)

[Bobbie Jo]

11. Yes...of course it is.....and Yes, it is WRONG.

Is this a flame-bating OP?

Yes ( 1 vote)

No

[tabbycat31]

14. OP here

I am not flame-baiting.

I'm in an argument at another forum (non DU) about this and I'm posting a poll everywhere to back my theory up. I'm trying to win an argument against a fundy RW Catholic.

[Citizen Number 9]

21. By all means

Let us know if you "win" and how you did it.

[hendo]

25. if they are a RW Fundie Catholic

they probably will not take the results of a poll on this forum seriously.

[Quantess]

19. I don't think it's intended as flamebait.

This is not nearly controversial enough on DU to be flamebait.

Flame bait would be something like, if the pharmacist had pit bulls in his office and refused to fill your prescription because you didn't breast feed your baby...

[jmowreader]

48. You left out Olive Garden and the moran/moron controversy...

[BattyDem]

12. The moment your religious beliefs interfere with my life ...

you are imposing those beliefs on me.

[Jamastiene]

33. Exactly. n/t

[dmallind]

13. Most likely, but not necessarily

As long as teh pharmacy, during every minute of its opening hours, has at least one staff member who will dispense any medicine or sell any product offered, then the religious pharmacist cannot stop you from getting what you want or need.

Of course, I trust the financial decision makers of said pharmacy will spot the obvious redundancy here and take appropriate action.

[BattyDem]

17. Having a staff member who will fulfill your prescription is fine, just as long as ...

the religious pharmacist quietly takes your prescription and hands it to the other pharmacist to be filled. No comments, no lectures, no discussion of his beliefs.


Things that are never addressed when talking about this issue ...

What happens when religious people outside the medical profession demand the same rights?

A person knows what his/her responsibilities will be when they accept a job, so why are they allowed to refuse to do a part of their job after they're hired?

What happens to the small business owner who is stuck with an employee who refuses to perform certain job-related activities because of his/her religious beliefs? Why should they have to hire more employees to do the job that the religious employee agreed to do when hired? :shrug:

[dmallind]

18. Agreed on all counts

Which is why I suspect in most profit-based companies such actions will not be tolerated for long. For privately held fundy-owned pharmacies who knows, but I can't imagine Walgreens or CVS just letting this happen.

[hughee99]

24. I agree, but if this is the case

why does the pharmacist have to share their issues with the customer? At any store, if I ask someone for help, and they can't help me, they'll usually direct me to someone who can. Obviously, they're not going to let people walk around behind the pharmacy counter, so if the customer asks for something they won't do, they should, on their own, just ask the other pharmacist (or whoever) to help you. Why get into their own problems with the customer at all?

[Citizen Number 9]

20. Yes. Professionals must do what is in the best inteest of their

clients and patients or risk being considered non-professional.

And no, I don't mean spiritual best interests. That's for another type of professional....

[Deep13]

22. It shifts the practical burden of those beliefs onto the patient.

If the pharmacist believes a contraceptive pill is murder, that is his perogative. He may believe what he wants as long as he does his duty and fills the goddamn prescription. Otherwise, he is essentially penalizing the patient for not being part of his religion.

[JerseygirlCT]

46. Exactly

And if his beliefs are so strong that he cannot ever fill such a prescription (and keep in mind many women use those for reasons other than birth control, too), then he needs to assume the burden of his own morals and find a different career.

It shouldn't fall to the customer to support his morals.

[Lars39]

23. Who are the imbeciles voting no?

Identify yourselves so that we may give you retroactive F's for biology.

[ColbertWatcher]

26. Yes, kick and rec. n/t

[zorahopkins]

27. Absolutely!

It is absolutely the case that the pharmacist is imposing HIS stupid *arped religious beliefs on me *hen he refuses to fill a prescription because HIS stupid *arped religious beliefs tell him not too!

Just fill the prescription, dammit! No judgment, No moralizing!

Note: In protest of the continuing occupation of OUR *hite House by the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Cheney regime of thugs and cronies, I REFUSE to use the letter bet*een "V" and "X". You should, too.

[ieoeja]

28. A pharmacist tried that in downtown Chicago a couple years back.

Police had to be called in to quell an impromptu protest of professional women working downtown who are not accustomed to putting up with this kind of shit.

Should Roe-v-Wade ever be overturned, any state seriously inclined to outlaw abortion should consider the implications of that incident. Unlike back in '73, there are a lot of women in seats of power today. And a couple years ago, they were in this angry mob when someone stymied their rights.

[David__77]

29. I do not support any accomodations for these beliefs on such jobs.

The license to be pharmacist must be contingent upon fulfilling one's public duties, not as one chooses to understand them, but in accord with relevant laws.

[hamsterjill]

30. Pharmacist is not the doctor

By refusing to fill a prescription properly prescribed by a licensed medical doctor, physician's assistant, etc., the pharmacist IS imposing his/her religious beliefs on me if he/she refuses to fill that prescription.

A pharmacist should not assume to know more about what's appropriate for my health than my health care professional.

[Greyhound]

32. Seems a silly question to me, of course that is an imposition of belief. n/t

[kleec]

34. Of course it is

A pharmacist has every right to their own religious beliefs (no matter how silly they may be), but it they are working in a public place then I would say they should keep their beliefs to themselves or find another job. I read somewhere a while back that a pharmacy put up signs in their windows to let the public know they would not fill certain prescriptions. I don't know if that is legal or not, but at least they let people know before they entered the building. Some people just hate the fact that a woman has the right to choose how she handles her life.

[nichomachus]

36. It's very easy to overcome

You simply make it a rule that a pharmacy, whenever it is open, has to be able to dispense all legal and prescribed medication within a certain length of time and at no inconvenience to the customer. An individual pharmacist would be willing to follow his-her religious beliefs, but the pharmacy itself has to be able to dispense all medications.

That is not unreasonable. There is currently a rule that pharmacies cannot be open without a pharmacist being present.

With that new rule in place, the pharmacy could hire a religious zealot, but would have to ensure that they had another non-zealot pharmacist on duty at the same time to fill prescriptions the zealot will not.

That will put a sudden end to this nonsense, as most large pharmacies are not willing to overstaff just to satisfy the whims of religious zealots.

[Deja Q]

37. It is.

And now for the meandering, lengthier explanation: If the pharmacist wanted to debate with customers and the customer wanted a friendly chat on beliefs, why not? But the prescription is between the doctor and customer; the pharmacist's involvement is not warranted and is imposing their views wrongfully. People will always disagree and squabble, but we're still a free country. It's inevitable somebody will do something another won't like. As long as it doesn't impact the other person's health, a thought provoking conversation is rarely a bad thing...

[bean fidhleir]

38. Dispensing is a secular role. Anyone who puts their religion before their role is definitely

imposing their religion on me, if I want the product of their secular role.

Imagine a bus driver who decides his religion prevents him driving past my church, and that I should have to walk over from the stop near *his* church.

[newtothegame]

39. Hahah accusations of flamebaiting...

code for "I'm on DU to find trolls and nothing else! Forget real discussion!" When "outing" trolls becomes the objective, we've lost something. I'll take a million trolls over lack of a discussion...is it really the end of the world if some fundie pop ups every now and then.

PS My vote is Yes.

[etherealtruth]

40. It is a major breach of professional ethics ...

... whatever the rationale.

[quaker bill]

41. If one has a religious problem

with the responsibilities of a job, then the appropriate thing to do is seek other employment. I had a great offer that included a free college education but required working for the Defense Department, being a Quaker, I turned it down. Later when seeking a job as a biologist / ecologist, I was offered a position as a ranger in a preserve I enjoy, protecting endangered species. The position required law enforcement training and carrying a weapon, being a Quaker, I will not bear arms, so I turned it down. Eventually, I found a position in environmental law enforcement where all I have to carry is a lawyer. I have no problems with lawyers, so this worked for me.

[ret5hd]

50. How big a holster does a lawyer require?

Do you hang 'im from a belt or do you have a shoulder holster? Does it require a concealed lawyer license?

[Vektor]

43. If you are unable to perform the duties of the job, you should not take the job. Period.

[JerseygirlCT]

45. Absolutely. No question about it

Either find someone else right there to fill it, or find another line of work - it's that simple.

His or her personal religious beliefs have zero to do with providing medical care to customers - which is what the pharmacist is there for.

[RainDog]

47. if the person cannot do the job they were hired to do b/c of religious beliefs

they should get another job.

if that situation happened to me, I would work to have that person fired, at the least. maybe I'd try to sue the company that hired the person too.

women do not need to have to suffer this sort of shit from anyone.

[pleah]

49. Absolutely! n/t

[Bucky]

51. It is only imposing religious beliefs on me if they also say "Have a blessed day"

[Sanctified]

52. If the pharmacist owns the pharmacy then no.

If the pharmacist is an employee then the company needs to deal with the pharmacist for making them lose money.