Federal Gov't is trying make birth control being considered

[Fingon]

So if I work in a gun store and have no problem with rifles, but object to people buying pistols, should I be allowed to refuse to sell them? Taking a job implies that I'm willing to carry out ALL of the job requirements, not just those I agree with, otherwise I should get a different job.

I have said earlier that these pharmacies are within their rights to fire employees that refuse to sell drugs. However, should you be required to sell pistols if you are the gun store owner? Hell no.

[Ramius]

So we force people to do their jobs now? Socialism does not = good. Thats why drug and insurance prices are so high.

 

You're off your self-righteous bible thumping rocker. If you are hired to do a job, you are expected to do the job you are hired for. If you refuse to do the job outlined in the description, you can and should be fired. When you're working down at jiffy lube, and you decide that you aren't going to change change oil in foreign cars because it's "immoral" to you, they can and will fire your ass for not doing your job.

 

Its simple. If your job is to fill prescriptions, you fill the prescriptions. If you refuse to do your job, you should be fired. If you decide that your job violates your religious beliefs, its up to you to find another job, not up to the government to tell companies that you are exempt from certain parts of your job. If you're jewish, dont go to work at a pork factory and then complain it violates your religious beliefs.

 

Its kind of funny how someone who wants government "hands off" supports something that encourages government interference in the workplace.

[Fingon]

Should a doctor be required to perform a sex change if it will help eliminate the patients depression?

[Fingon]

You're off your self-righteous bible thumping rocker. If you are hired to do a job, you are expected to do the job you are hired for. If you refuse to do the job outlined in the description, you can and should be fired. When you're working down at jiffy lube, and you decide that you aren't going to change change oil in foreign cars because it's "immoral" to you, they can and will fire your ass for not doing your job.

 

Its simple. If your job is to fill prescriptions, you fill the prescriptions. If you refuse to do your job, you should be fired. If you decide that your job violates your religious beliefs, its up to you to find another job, not up to the government to tell companies that you are exempt from certain parts of your job. If you're jewish, dont go to work at a pork factory and then complain it violates your religious beliefs.

You are a complete fool. I suggest you acquire some better reading comprehension skills before you make an idiot of yourself.... too late. If you notice i said the pharmacy is within its rights to fire any employee that will not sell something. Apparently, you cannot read very well.

[JK2000]

How about showing me that they won't be able to find another pharmacy? You can't. There may be a shortage of pharmacies, but it's not to the extent that you cannot find another.

 

 

There is a thing in government called regulation within reason. Most businesses are regulated within reason, but not the medical field. You haven't given a good reason as to why these pharmacies should be forced to carry a non-essential drug. There are a million other options that a person can use.

 

A million????

 

May I take a guess and assume that you have no need to purchase any form of birth control?

[Ramius]

You are a complete fool. I suggest you acquire some better reading comprehension skills before you make a complete fool out of yourself.... too late. If you notice i said the pharmacy is within its rights to fire any employee that will not sell something. Apparently, you cannot read very well.

 

How about you try some reading comprehension yourself? Or better yet, try reading the actual article posted instead of exposing yourself as a complete fraud.

 

Pharmacists could use the rule as a justification for refusing to fill birth control prescriptions

 

This isn't about CVS refusing to stock birth control as you are so incorrectly making it out to be, this is about Joe Fingon, the self-righteous bible thumper, refusing to fill the prescription of Jane, who stopped by after work to pick up her birth control. Try reading the article, dolt.

 

EDIT: CVS has the right as a business to not supply birth control pills. However, if CVS chooses to stock the pill, then it is the pharmacist's responsibility, as part of their job, to fill the prescription.

[Chilly]

How about showing me that they won't be able to find another pharmacy? You can't. There may be a shortage of pharmacies, but it's not to the extent that you cannot find another.

 

You're the one making the claim that you can just drive to another pharmacy without an issue. Back it up.

 

There is a thing in government called regulation within reason. Most businesses are regulated within reason, but not the medical field. You haven't given a good reason as to why these pharmacies should be forced to carry a non-essential drug.

 

I already have, you've just ignored it.

 

There are a million other options that a person can use.

 

List the million other options that are equivalent to birth control.

 

(By the way, BC has other applicable uses, like Ramius mentioned above. My gf, for example, has really bad acne due to hormonal issues if she's not on Birth Control. But hey, keep ignoring that point just like you have a bunch of other ones).

[Fingon]

You're the one making the claim that you can just drive to another pharmacy without an issue. Back it up.

 

 

 

I already have, you've just ignored it.

 

 

 

List the million other options that are equivalent to birth control.

 

(By the way, BC has other applicable uses, like Ramius mentioned above. My gf, for example, has really bad acne due to hormonal issues if she's not on Birth Control. But hey, keep ignoring that point just like you have a bunch of other ones).

So your argument is that controlling acne is worth removing a pharmacy's rights to carry non-essential medication? Also, why the hell would i have to back that up? There are about 55,000 pharmacies in this country, and that number is always increasing. Your argument is that BC is essential to controlling the population of unwanted children, but BC is only 1.7% more effective than a condom. Keep on the socialist think tank... you will only bankrupt everyone before you realize carrying every single medicine ever invented is a waste of money.

[KD in CA]

Please, Pharmacists should be able to choose which drugs to give... it's called FREEEDOM OF CHOICE.

 

This is the dumbest statement I've read here in a while. Are you completely insane? It's the doctor's job to prescribe medicine. It's the pharmacist job to put it in a little bottle and hand it to you. What's next? ER doctors have the 'freedom' to choose not to treat someone because of their religion or skin color or because they took the pill??

 

If you have a problem giving people certain drugs, DON'T BE A !@#$ING PHARMACIST! There's your 'freedom of choice'.

 

[Fingon]

How about you try some reading comprehension yourself? Or better yet, try reading the actual article posted instead of exposing yourself as a complete fraud.

 

 

 

This isn't about CVS refusing to stock birth control as you are so incorrectly making it out to be, this is about Joe Fingon, the self-righteous bible thumper, refusing to fill the prescription of Jane, who stopped by after work to pick up her birth control. Try reading the article, dolt.

 

EDIT: CVS has the right as a business to not supply birth control pills. However, if CVS chooses to stock the pill, then it is the pharmacist's responsibility, as part of their job, to fill the prescription.

I am not debating the article here... I said on like page 1 or 2 that a pharmacist can and should be fired. Also, i find it funny that you think i'm a bible thumper. The issue i am debating is whether the government should force you to carry and sell BC.

[Fingon]

This is the dumbest statement I've read here in a while. Are you completely insane? It's the doctor's job to prescribe medicine. It's the pharmacist job to put it in a little bottle and hand it to you. What's next? ER doctors have the 'freedom' to choose not to treat someone because of their religion or skin color or because they took the pill??

 

If you have a problem giving people certain drugs, DON'T BE A !@#$ING PHARMACIST! There's your 'freedom of choice'.

 

Again, i said that a pharmacist should have the option whether or not to carry non-essential drugs; try reading. If you open a hospital should you be forced to perform plastic surgery?

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

So your argument is that controlling acne is worth removing a pharmacy's rights to carry non-essential medication? Also, why the hell would i have to back that up? There are about 55,000 pharmacies in this country, and that number is always increasing. Your argument is that BC is essential to controlling the population of unwanted children, but BC is only 1.7% more effective than a condom. Keep on the socialist think tank... you will only bankrupt everyone before you realize carrying every single medicine ever invented is a waste of money.

are condoms considered birth control, and thereby contributing to abortion under this rule change? should they be classified under the same definition as bc pills?

[Ramius]

I am not debating the article here... I said on like page 1 or 2 that a pharmacist can and should be fired. Also, i find it funny that you think i'm a bible thumper. The issue i am debating is whether the government should force you to carry and sell BC.

 

First, try to re-read the article again and this time, understand it. Second, look up and learn the definitions of pharmacy and pharmacist, and then maybe you can come back and try to argue with the adults again.

[Fingon]

are condoms considered birth control, and thereby contributing to abortion under this rule change? should they be classified under the same definition as bc pills?

Should a pharmacy be forced to carry condoms? I think not. A lot of states have mandated that pharmacies carry birth control. Hell, pharmacies shouldn't have to carry claritin if they don't want to.

[Fingon]

First, try to re-read the article again and this time, understand it. Second, look up and learn the definitions of pharmacy and pharmacist, and then maybe you can come back and try to argue with the adults again.

You do realize that many pharmacies are owned by the pharmacist, correct? I agree that Pharmacists working for corporations should be fired for not selling BC. I said that on page 1 or 2.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Should a pharmacy be forced to carry condoms? I think not. A lot of states have mandated that pharmacies carry birth control. Hell, pharmacies shouldn't have to carry claritin if they don't want to.

that's not the question I asked; I asked whether condoms should fall under the same definition as bc pills, and thereby allowing a subjective decision to sell them or not, assuming they're in the store of course.

[Chilly]

So your argument is that controlling acne is worth removing a pharmacy's rights to carry non-essential medication?

 

My arguments are in many prior posts in this thread. Feel free to take a refresher, then once you understand what you are talking about, get back to me.

 

Also, why the hell would i have to back that up?

 

Because, you douche, the person who makes the claim has to provide proof of it being true. It's how debating works. Look it up on Wikipedia.

 

There are about 55,000 pharmacies in this country, and that number is always increasing.

 

Have you found any information about pharmacies in rural America yet?

 

Your argument is that BC is essential to controlling the population of unwanted children, but BC is only 1.7% more effective than a condom.

 

Ah yes, the good ol' perfect use failure rate difference. Do you know the actual difference in failure rates? How about the effect of convenience on the different birth control methods?

 

Keep on the socialist think tank... you will only bankrupt everyone before you realize carrying every single medicine ever invented is a waste of money.

 

Forcing pharmacists to sell birth control is totally bankrupting America.

[Fingon]

that's not the question I asked; I asked whether condoms should fall under the same definition as bc pills, and thereby allowing a subjective decision to sell them or not, assuming they're in the store of course.

Should you be able to sell or not sell them? Of course... do you have the right to be fired? Of course.

[Adam]

Uh... since when is refusing to carry a certain medication akin to sacrificing people? If a certain pharmacy doesn't carry a certain medication... GO TO ANOTHER PHARMACY. There are plenty of people who will gladly take your money.

So now we are determining that one thing is more inconvenient than another? Once you open that door, you don't get to close it. Thats why I used such an extreme example.

 

So we force people to do their jobs now? Socialism does not = good. Thats why drug and insurance prices are so high.

Not that cut and dry. Socialism doesn't always equal bad, capitalism doesn't always equal good. Given a country of our size, capitalism is usually the way to go, but sometimes you need regulations. In a small country that is trying to survive, socialism could be the best bet.

[KD in CA]

Again, i said that a pharmacist should have the option whether or not to carry non-essential drugs; try reading. If you open a hospital should you be forced to perform plastic surgery?

 

Try learning how to write. A "Pharmacist" is an individual. A "Pharmacy" is a business and all such businesses are not required to carry all drugs. You are suggesting that an individual Pharmacist at CVS or Walgreens should not have to dispense drugs they don't like even though the owner of the pharmacy has chosen to carry the drug.