It would be more like a gun dealer becoming liable for deaths. Acknowledging that evil exists... Often times, a drug has multiple purposes (just like guns) and they are there to provide that resource.
The morning-after pill has no other use, therefore the analogy does work because the pharmacist knows for a fact that the 'gun' will be used to kill someone.
They should be fired by their companies and have no legal recourse to fight it. Getting between a patient/doctor decision isn't about what is legal, it's about what's right. Denying a prescription based on your morals is a cop out and it is selfish because you don't know what the doctor and the patient discussed and you don't know how the medicine will necessarily be used.
They aren't getting between the doctor and patient: 1) Doctors rarely prescribe the morning-after pill and 2)They are merely refusing to do it themselves. It is not as if they are ripping up the prescription sheet and disallowing the customer from going to the next store.
If they're willing to sacrifice business so be it.
The morning-after pill has no other use, therefore the analogy does work because the pharmacist knows for a fact that the 'gun' will be used to kill someone.
They should be fired by their companies and have no legal recourse to fight it. Getting between a patient/doctor decision isn't about what is legal, it's about what's right. Denying a prescription based on your morals is a cop out and it is selfish because you don't know what the doctor and the patient discussed and you don't know how the medicine will necessarily be used.
They aren't getting between the doctor and patient: 1) Doctors rarely prescribe the morning-after pill and 2)They are merely refusing to do it themselves. It is not as if they are ripping up the prescription sheet and disallowing the customer from going to the next store.
If they're willing to sacrifice business so be it.
Reply
Leave a comment