Appeals court rules Christian-owned pharmacy must sell morning-after p

[angels4u]

http://www.worldmag.com/2015/07/appeals_court_rules_christian_owned_pharmacy_must_sell_morning_after_pill

 

Appeals court rules Christian-owned pharmacy must sell morning-after pill

[missmuffet]

Yes,in the past a pharmacist could refuse to sell a product for religious reasons but now companies are telling them if you don't sell these products you can go elsewhere.

[ayin jade]

Hubby and I have followed this story. This is a further attack on Christian religious rights. 

[missmuffet]

Hubby and I have followed this story. This is a further attack on Christian religious rights. 

Yes,it is and I do not think that a Christian should be forced to go against their belief and sell this stuff.Christian rights are being stepped on while gay rights are being exalted.

[ayin jade]

Not a single pharmacy can keep every single drug on the shelf either. Inventory has to be based on what is profitable and used by the local population. For instance you wouldnt have childrens medications in a pharmacy located in a senior living area. The meds would expire before they are ever used. So this ruling is also saying the pharmacy must stock something they dont want to stock, as well as sell something they dont want to sell. In my view, this is a violation of the constitution in that the feds are interfering in the business of a company in a state. Amendment 10 I think? Assuming I know what Im talking about with regard to the constitution lol.

[MorningGlory]

Not a single pharmacy can keep every single drug on the shelf either. Inventory has to be based on what is profitable and used by the local population. For instance you wouldnt have childrens medications in a pharmacy located in a senior living area. The meds would expire before they are ever used. So this ruling is also saying the pharmacy must stock something they dont want to stock, as well as sell something they dont want to sell. In my view, this is a violation of the constitution in that the feds are interfering in the business of a company in a state. Amendment 10 I think? Assuming I know what Im talking about with regard to the constitution lol.

 

 

I looked it up because I was curious.  Sorry, this is long but it's pretty informative and it looks like the 9th Circuit Cort of Appeals is acting unlawfully the way I read it. Scroll down to the bolded part for Washington State.  Time for a S.C. challenge.   From ncsl.org.

 

Pharmacist Conscience Clauses: Laws and Information

Updated May 2012

Health provider “refusal clauses” (also known as "conscience clauses") were first enacted in response to the United States Supreme Court's decision in the Roe v. Wade case, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).  Roe v. Wade was the landmark decision establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional righy to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion.  Some states have subsequently proposed legislation and passed laws designed to allow doctors and other direct providers of health care to refuse to perform or assist in an abortion, and hospitals to refuse to allow abortion on their premises.  Now, the issue is expanding as pharmacists are refusing to fill emergency contraception and contraception prescriptions. This movement resulted in the term “conscience clause," which gives pharmacists the right to refuse to perform certain services based on a violation of personal beliefs or values. Most of the debate revolves around a pharmacist dispensing emergency contraception. Emergency contraception is used to prevent a pregnancy, not terminate a pregnancy, and is a general term used to describe several different types of birth control pills that are used in increased doses within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse.  Emergency contraception is not the same thing as Mifeprex, which is the brand name of mifepristone in the United States and is sometimes referred to as non-surgical abortion, medical abortion, or RU-486.  Pharmacists do not play a role in administering these medications. 

In some states, legislators are introducing bills that would explicitly grant pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense drugs related to contraception on moral grounds. Other state legislators are introducing legislation that would require pharmacies to fill any legal prescription for birth control, much like the former Governor's emergency rule in Illinois, which requires pharmacies to provide the morning after pill. Six states (Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota) have passed laws allowing a pharmacist to refuse to dispense emergency contraception drugs. Illinois passed an emergency rule that requires a pharmacist to dispense FDA approved contraception. Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Maine and Tennesee have broad refusal clauses that do not specifically mention pharmacists.

California pharmacists have a duty to dispense prescriptions and can only refuse to dispense a prescription, including contraceptives, when their employer approves the refusal and the woman can still access her prescription in a timely manner.

New Jersey's  law prohibits pharmacists for refusing to fill prescriptions solely on moral, religious or ethical grounds.

Washington's law allows pharmacists to dispense emergency contraception without a prescription through collaborative practice agreement and state-approved protocol.

Washington and Wisconsin laws requires that emergency rooms provide information about emergency contraception upon request as well as dispense it upon request.

Conscience Clause Laws (allowing the refusal to fill)

Arkansas § 20-9-1001 allows certain individuals or entities to refuse to perform abortion services and provide or dispense contraceptives in all or most circumstances.

California SB 644 Chapter No. 417 prohibits a health care licentiate from obstructing a patient in obtaining a prescription drug or device and would require the licentiate to dispense drugs and devices pursuant to a lawful prescription or order except in specified circumstances, including on ethical, moral, or religious grounds asserted by the licentiate.

Colorado Rev. Stat. 25-6-102 states that no private institution, it employees, or physicians may be held liable for refusing to dispense contraceptive supplies, procedures or information if their refusal is based on a moral or religious objection to such activities.

Florida 2003 Stat. XXIX 381.0051 states that physicians or other people may not be held liable for refusing to dispense contraceptive or family planning devices, services or information.

Georgia Admin. Code § 480-5-.03 provides that a pharmacist shall not be required to fill a prescription for an emergency contraceptive drug; provides that such refusal shall not be the basis for any claim for damages; provides for the duration of the effectiveness of the written objection; provides for related matters; repeals conflicting laws.

Idaho Code § 18-611 provides that no health care professional shall be required to provide any health care service that violates his or her conscience.

Illinois requires pharmacies to dispense contraception. Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) issued emergency rules that require pharmacies in the state to dispense FDA-approved contraceptives. If the pharmacy does not have the drug or a suitable substitute in stock, then the pharmacy must order the medication through standard procedures, transfer the prescription to another local pharmacy or return the prescription to the patient. The emergency rules will be in effect only for 150 days, after which the state is expected to begin the normal rulemaking process in order to make the requirement rule permanent.

Maine Rev. Stat. tit. 22, 1903 (1973) gives physicians and agents of medical and related facilities the right to refuse to provide family planning services when such actions would interfere with moral or religious beliefs.

Mississippi Code Ann. § 41-41-215 permits health care providers, including pharmacists or other pharmacy employees, counselors, social workers, health insures and health care facilities to refuse to provide [any] medical services, including counseling and referral, on religious or ethical grounds (SB 2619).

South Dakota Codified Laws § 36-11-70  allows pharmacists the right to refuse to provide services.

Tennessee Code Ann. 68-34-104 allows physicians or any agent of such an entity to refuse to offer contraceptive services, supplies, or information if it interferes with a moral or religious belief.  States that physicians or other agents may not be held liable for this refusal.

Washington RCW48.43.065 allows for no individual health care provider, religiously sponsored carrier, or health care facility be required by law or contract in any circumstances to participate in the provision of or payment for a specific service if they object to so doing for reason of conscience or religion.

Also: On June 1, 2006 the Washington Board of Pharmacy approved proposed rule language regarding a pharmacist’s responsibilities in dispensing a lawful prescription.  This language would amend Washington Admin. Code 246-863-095 to prohibit a pharmacist from delegating the decision not to dispense prescriptions for any reason.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures; Denver, Colorado.

[archaeologist55]

if you are a christian and own a store that sells alcohol isn't that act going against Christian beliefs?  Selling a product may not actually be supporting someone's lifestyle nor going against someone's faith.

 

I would not be too quick to leap to conclusions that may present yourselves as hypocritical.  Christians sell knives and other weapons which are used for purely anti-christian purposes should Christians stop selling everything because products can be used in an anti-christian way?

[ayin jade]

if you are a christian and own a store that sells alcohol isn't that act going against Christian beliefs?  Selling a product may not actually be supporting someone's lifestyle nor going against someone's faith.

 

I would not be too quick to leap to conclusions that may present yourselves as hypocritical.  Christians sell knives and other weapons which are used for purely anti-christian purposes should Christians stop selling everything because products can be used in an anti-christian way?

 

 

There is only ONE use for plan b. Christian pharmacists I know feel quite strongly that they cant sell it. Nothing hypocritical about it. 

[Qnts2]

if you are a christian and own a store that sells alcohol isn't that act going against Christian beliefs?  Selling a product may not actually be supporting someone's lifestyle nor going against someone's faith.

 

I would not be too quick to leap to conclusions that may present yourselves as hypocritical.  Christians sell knives and other weapons which are used for purely anti-christian purposes should Christians stop selling everything because products can be used in an anti-christian way?

 

Knives and weapons are not against scripture. I own knives and use them to cut rope, cleaning fish, etc. None of these uses are against any scripture, or defined in the bible as sins. Knives don't kill people, people kill people. A knife has a valid good use, but can be used by a sinful person in a sinful way. Knives can also be used in a good way. Or finally, having a knife is not a sin. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason selling knives would go against a Christian faith.

 

However, a morning after pill is designed to do an abortion, if a person has become pregnant. When developed, the intended use of the pill is a violation of scripture. If a pharmacy sells a morning after pill, they are selling a pill with only one use, abortion.    

[archaeologist55]

we can go around and around on this all day and I for one do not want to get into an emotional argument or discussion. i would rather that you all keep things in perspective and not label something persecution when it is not.

 

if i were a pharmacist i am sure i would have a problem with selling the pill but then maybe christian pharmacists should stop selling condoms, birth control and other methods that stop pregnancies if they do not want to be seen as hypocritical.