Does this mean that the Pope has the last word for the whole world, and that Roman Catholics rule? It might cause people to look at RC people in a very different light.

“Does this mean that the Pope has the last word for the whole world, and that Roman Catholics rule? It might cause people to look at RC people in a very different light.”
“In a speech to participants at the 25th International Congress of _CATHOLIC_ Pharmacists…”
God bless.

So, Joey, what you are saying is that these pharmacists have the right to control other people’s lives at the whim of an old man at the Vatican? I smell lawsuits ‘a formulatin’

WHAT? Could you be any more disrespectful by calling the Pope “an old man at the Vatican”?
He’s saying that Catholic pharmacists should not violate their conscience and live their faith, not just give it lip service. They can’t, and shouldn’t, be forced to violate their beliefs. If there is such a big demand for pharmacists to provide those items then businesses will emply pharmacists who will dispense that stuff.
And I hope someone sues. It would remind people why we have freedom of religion in this country.

“And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.”
Matthew 5:29-31
If Catholic phamacists can’t fill prescriptions because of their religious beliefs, they should find other employment.

And vegetarian restaurants should be required to serve meat.
And Jewish delis should be required to serve ham and cheese sandwiches.
And PETA should be required to endorse rodeos.
Why should they be treated any different than Catholic pharmacists?
If a store does not have the shoes you want, go to another store.
If a pharmacy does not have the drugs you want, go to another pharmacy.
Respect and tolerance is a two-way street.

“If a store does not have the shoes you want, go to another store.
If a pharmacy does not have the drugs you want, go to another pharmacy.”
Here’s the problem with that: EC (emergency contraception) is an EMERGENCY. The sooner you take it, the greater the probability that it has time to prevent a pregnancy. If you want a ham and cheese sandwich, you might be frustrated by discovering that the deli you went to will to will not serve you one. However, a) You probably shouldn’t have gone to a kosher deli, and b) Not getting your precise sandwich at that exact moment _probably_ won’t completely ruin your life.
With EC, however, a) You have no way of knowing whether a pharmacy will distribute to you until the exact moment you get there (as it depends not just on pharmacy choice, but also on day and shift) and b) Not getting the EC actually _could_ make your life a lot more miserable, especially if you do conceive, and then have to decide whether or not to abort–which, by the way, no one disputes is a heart-wrenching decision, whether you are pro- or anti-choice.
Blessings,
Lexa

Another addition to what Lexa said: what about those people who live in towns where there is only the one pharmacy? And what if everyone in that pharmacy refuses to give out EC on religious principle? Because it’s not just Catholics that are refusing to give it out-my non-Catholic friends have also expressed their disagreement with EC, and that if they were a pharmacist, they wouldn’t hand it out on principle either.
Now, I am ALL for respecting peoples’ right to their religion. But I grew up in a town where the nearest place they’d have a pharmacist willing to hand out EC would be an hour away, in a college town, and that same college town (where I attended college) is where I met my first non-Christian person EVER. EVERYONE that I had contact with in the town I grew up in was Christian, and a great portion of those Christians were of Roman Catholic persuasion. And so, with great respect to those pharmacists’ religious beliefs, I would also ask those who say “go somewhere else” – where do you expect some of these people to go?

This has already played out in Illinois over the last couple of years.
What they settled on was multi-faceted.
-A pharmacy could opt to not sell any form of FDA approved contraception.
-If the pharmacy stocks contraceptives then, if a phamacist could refuse to fill the prescription…however, a trained technician could fill it…or, a store owner could fill it after calling another pharmacy to get instructions from a lic pharmacist. Or, a pharmacy could arrange to have another phamacy fill the prescription and have it delivered to the patient.
Peace!

“So, Joey, what you are saying is that these pharmacists have the right to control other people’s lives at the whim of an old man at the Vatican?”
Are you saying other people have the right to control those pharmacists’ lives, when they happen to believe that certain old man at the Vatican?
God bless.

This pope continues to overstep his boundaries. If a pharmacist doesn’t want to dispense legally prescribed drugs, then find another job. This is no differnet than Muslim cab drivers not wanting to take fares whose actions went against their religous beliefs. Beleive whatever you want, but if you are conducting business in the public marketplace, and customers are within their legal rights to request goods or services that you provide, do your job!
I am sick to death of popes, imams, ayatollahs, the religious right and hypocritical politicians trying to force their concept of morality down other people’s throats!

“Are you saying other people have the right to control those pharmacists’ lives, when they happen to believe that certain old man at the Vatican?”
Yes. Absolutely. Their lives as pharmacists are controlled by a myriad of state and federal laws, to say nothing of their employers’ rules and policies. If a Catholic pharmacist refuses to fill a prescription they should seek other employment or go work for a Catholic hospital where their souls will be un-troubled. If the choice is between a paycheck and conscience, between god and mammon there is only one choice a faithful, believing, “inspite-of-dungeon,-fire,-and-sword” Catholic can make.

If there is no pharmacy in town that will supply EC or whatever some of us believe to be immoral, it sounds like a great opportunity for someone to open a competing pharmacy that will provide what they want.
If you have an emergency, you should already have a plan as to how you will handle that emergency. Most of us have lists of emergency phone numbers by our telephone (although 911 covers most of that now). We have plans on where to meet our families if we are evacuated. Why is it so hard to know what pharmacy can provide what you need?
And, why should a person with particular religious beliefs be told to get another profession? Laws that force anyone to violate their religious beliefs are unconstitutional. My wife’s doctor does not prescribe any form of birth control – nothing. He makes this clear to all patients. That is why my wife goes to him.

What if I am a gun dealer? Would I be violating your right to bear arms if I didn’t sell you a gun because I felt it was my morale obligation not to arm Christians? What if I was a judge, and I felt it was my morale obligation to put all fundimental Christians into jail? Would I be violating your rights? Or what if my religion prohibits me from treating sick Christians? I could just let you die on the ER table, and then claim that it was my right due to religion. Would that be fair to you or your family members? I think not in all these cases. If I couldn’t do my job in a fair way in all of these cases, I should have another job. A pharmacist took the hipocratic oath, and if he cannot fullfill his oath to serve his patients, he should not be a pharmacist.

“My wife’s doctor does not prescribe any form of birth control – nothing. He makes this clear to all patients. That is why my wife goes to him.”
Are you saying your wife is tempted to avail herself of birth control and the only way she can keep it out her hands is to go to a doctor who won’t prescribe it?!?

“And, why should a person with particular religious beliefs be told to get another profession? Laws that force anyone to violate their religious beliefs are unconstitutional. My wife’s doctor does not prescribe any form of birth control – nothing. He makes this clear to all patients. That is why my wife goes to him.”
And I’d be willing to bet that your wife’s physician is in private practice, and not working for someone else. When a pharmacist is working for an employer or a corporation, he/she does what his boss tells him/her to do. If the pharmacist finds this against his beliefs, he can switch jobs or open a pharmacy franchise, both are within his rights.
This is the only issue in healthcare where someone can refuse something on religious belief. You work for a business period. If you do not like what your employer does, leave.

“If a Catholic pharmacist refuses to fill a prescription they should seek other employment or go work for a Catholic hospital where their souls will be un-troubled.”
Not exactly true; more and more states are making laws that Catholic hospitals have to do things that go against their religious teachings, including proscribe birth control.
Phoenix, my main argument with most of your queries is that they are absolutely ridiculous and would never happen; no religion would endorse any of those ideas, because they make no sense. In the case of a Catholic pharmecist, they are perfectly willing to sell any drug, except a few certain types. And I cannot think of any other job where a person is told they must be willing to sell certain products.
God bless.

“Laws that force anyone to violate their religious beliefs are unconstitutional.”
No! If the Draft Board denies your CO status, you either go into the military or go to jail — your religion be damned. Moslem women cannot wear veils when being photographed for state ID’s. The children of Christian Scientists can be removed from their parent’s control in order to give them medical treatment. Religious belief does not trump the law.
Let all those believing Catholic pharmacists form their own business enterprises (suggested names: “Holier than Thou Pharmacies and Our Lady of Righteous Indignation Drugs and Sundries) where they can peddle and preach their catechism to their heart’s content.

“Are you saying your wife is tempted to avail herself of birth control and the only way she can keep it out her hands is to go to a doctor who won’t prescribe it?!?”
No, she goes there because he shares her values, specifically, he values the life of all children, born and unborn.

“A pharmacist took the hipocratic oath, and if he cannot fullfill his oath to serve his patients, he should not be a pharmacist.”
Ah, the point exactly. The Hippocratic Oath is, in many people’s opinions, being violated by hippocrits who do not want to preserve all life.

“And I’d be willing to bet that your wife’s physician is in private practice, and not working for someone else. When a pharmacist is working for an employer or a corporation, he/she does what his boss tells him/her to do. If the pharmacist finds this against his beliefs, he can switch jobs or open a pharmacy franchise, both are within his right.”
There are two separate issues in this statement – the rights of the employer (balanced with the rights of the employee to be free of religious discrimination) and the legal obligations of the pharmacist.
Yes, the doctor is in private practice. But, in the case of pharmacists, it wouldn’t matter. In many states pharmacists who own their own business can no longer deny drugs that they believe to be immoral.

It would appear publicly-funded pharmacy schools may need to get people to sign an affidavit that they are willing to dispense all orders they may be given before the public aids in their education. Catholics who don’t plan to dispense things their religion discourages could, of course, go to a Catholic school.
This wouldn’t solve all cases but it would be a good start. Pharmacy students would have to give thought to what they will be asked to dispense and unless they lie, most cases of objectors could be caught before they are aided in educations they won’t fully use.
It’s striking to me that this has apparently not been a problem till the last few years. To me the sudden surge along with the Pope’s comment suggests a plot to deny people the medicines they need.
“WHAT? Could you be any more disrespectful by calling the Pope “an old man at the Vatican”?”
What part of that description is false?

Yes, they are completely absurd. I am trying to use completely absurd senerios to point out how completely absurd you are being. It is your thinking of “I believe it to be true, so therefore I will make everyone adhere to my moral standards” that angers the rest of us. I remember not long ago there was a pope that called the good ol’ Furher to take care of a problem he had. That problem was Jewish refugees knocking on the doors of the Vadican, PLEADING with him to let them in. It seems that Catholics forget that a lot. Or are they choosing to forget?? A doctor or pharmacist should not force their morality on others, more than others should force theirs on them. I am not forcing them to go to a Pagan rite, or sacrifice goats at the altar, I am asking them to fullfill their promise to me and to their employer and to the general public: to fill perscriptions.
I take medicine. What if a pharmacist was a Scientologist? Should he not fill my medicine because he thinks I am making up my illness?? What if they don’t believe in vacinations, and I am picking one up? Should they deny my family or myself vacinations just because they feel that “God can cure me through prayer?!!” Honestly!

“That problem was Jewish refugees knocking on the doors of the Vadican, PLEADING with him to let them in.”
Please produce a source document. If you refer to Pius 12, this is an urban legend (and off topic anyway).
“A doctor or pharmacist should not force their morality on others, more than others should force theirs on them.”
But you are forcing your morality on them. You believe certain procedures and drugs are moral and they don’t. Why should you be able to follow your values and deny them their’s? Freedom says each chooses their path, and free enterprise takes care of the marketplace.
“What if a pharmacist was a Scientologist? … What if they don’t believe in vacinations…? Should they deny my family or myself vacinations”
They are not denying you anything. You are free to get it somewhere else. They are free to follow their conscience.
I am frustrated that those that want freedom are so eager to deny that same freedom to those who disagree with them.

w, often someone could get the stuff elsewhere but a) it might be enough of an inconvenience the person puts it off long enough it doesn’t work, b) elsewhere might be some place they can’t get to. You think like a person with access to easy transportation but that’s not true of everyone.
And anyway, why should a person go into a job they know they can’t do? They can go elsewhere where the job agrees with them, like to a Catholic hospital.

“Ah, the point exactly. The Hippocratic Oath is, in many people’s opinions, being violated by hippocrits who do not want to preserve all life.”
I guess we should stop dispensing anti-biotics then. You’re killing all those poor innocent bacteria that want to use your body as a home. Use your brain.

And vegetarian restaurants should be required to serve meat.
And Jewish delis should be required to serve ham and cheese sandwiches.
And PETA should be required to endorse rodeos.
Why should they be treated any different than Catholic pharmacists?
This is SO apples and oranges, it’s hardly worth addressing, but I will anyway.
I can go anywhere I want to eat and get what I choose. I cannot, however, force a chinese restaurant, for example, to serve mexican food, because that is what I feel like eating when I go there.
Conversely, a pharmacist, however, has an obilgation to look after the health of the patient, as does a physician. That is primary in their obligations. I sincerely believe that in medical school, not a lot of time is spent in discussions of foisting one’s personal religious views on the patient when dispensing medication.
Further, for a variety of reasons, a patient very often does not have a wide choice of pharmacists when trying to fill a scrip.
Let’s try to keep it real, here.

This is just religion and science butting heads once again. Does anyone honestly believe the earth does not orbit the Sun? And why not? If the Pope said the sky was pink with purple polka dots then who would you believe him or your own eyes? The potential answer to that given this entire discussion scares me.
There is no inherent conflict between science and religion. It’s all political. Things would be just fine if to paraphrase Galileo we let religion tell us how to go to heaven and let science tell us how the heavens go.
Neither microwave ovens nor RU-486 were discussed in the Bible, Koran, Sutras, etc. Why is is so hard to realize when domains are being crossed?
Also, religions in genral really need to take a look at the conservation of belief over common sense issue alluded to above. I didn’t mention Galileo just at random. It took 300+ years for the church to admit they committed an enormous miscarriage of justice on that distinguished scientist. The dietary restrictions of most religions make absolutely no sense in the 21st century but they don’t seem to be up for re-evaluation.
I think the people in need of emergency medical treatment simpy don’t have the option to wait for religion to catch up with reality. It takes too long and when it comes down to it in many ways has a fundamentally different definition for the word “reality.”

It’s hard to believe that someone could support that this occupation is allowed to only be partly practiced because certain members believe certain parts of it conflict with their personal religious beliefs.
For example, no where is it written that all OB-GYN’s must perform abortions – some do, some don’t. There is a choice.
However, I’d like someone to show me where it’s written in medical literature or licensing procedures for pharmacists that “If your religious beliefs conflict with dispensing any particular medication, you don’t have to dispense it.” It would certainly be a rare exception, no?
I look to my pharmacist to talk to me about drug risks, as applicable; drug interactions, as applicable; and other medication-related information I need to know, as necessary. If a physician sees fit to prescribe me a med, ANY med, then the pharmacist’s obligation, barring certain specific risks as discussed above, is to give me that med, without the lecture and sanctimony, thank you very much.
My personal religious beliefs allowing me to take meds have just as much weight and validity as those of any objecting pharmacist. Allowing a pharmacist to “just say ‘no’” allows those religious beliefs to take precedence over mine, which is illegal.

And, oh, BTW, one more thought. A person does not have to hold any relgious beliefs whatsoever, and they are still entitled to receive a med that has been prescribed by a physician or anyone else legally authorized to prescribe meds.
A pharmacist is in a position of authority and has control over the lives of others, to an extent. For a pharmacist to refuse a patient’s scrip and state, “It’s against my religion,” is a patent abuse of that authority.

If a pharmacist has legitimate moral objections to selling these products, it would make a good deal more sense for them to quit the profession or find work where they don’t have those drugs available. Honestly, if a Christian clerk had a moral objection to selling firearms, they shouldn’t be working in a gun shop. Do these pharmacists really think they are drawing a line in the sand by not taking a bottle of emergency contraceptives from a counter in the back and handing it to the customer? Does that refusal somehow dissociate them from the fact that they work in a place that is packed with these products?
What happens when a sect of Christianity pops up that finds pain to be an absolute god-given right? Do you want to be the one on the operating table only to find out your surgeon is a recent convert who objects to anesthesia?

“no where is it written that all OB-GYN’s must perform abortions – some do, some don’t. There is a choice.
However, I’d like someone to show me where it’s written in medical literature or licensing procedures for pharmacists that “If your religious beliefs conflict with dispensing any particular medication, you don’t have to dispense it.”"
Why the distinction? Doctors don’t have to perform every procedure, but pharmacists (sole proprietors even) must dispense every drug? The logic is beyond me. I could “need” a medical procedure the doctor won’t perform as much as I could “need” a drug the pharmacist won’t deliver. I don’t see a difference.

m, here’s one difference I see.
A doctor performs a procedure (or does not perform one) based on many things – medical training, for example, and perhaps personal beliefs. They have the actual (versus apparent) legal authority to act on their own.
A pharmacist does not autonomously dispense presciption meds; it’s based on the direction of someone authorized to prescribe those meds. In most cases, that’s an MD. For example, my pharmacist cannot give me my anti-GERD med without the scrip that authorizes them to do so.

But the pharmacist does ask questions of the patient to verify the meds are appropriate and does not just dispense them without thought. They can choose between brand name and generic in many cases. And there have been recent discussions on letting pharmacists dispense some drugs (and I think EC is one of them!) without a doctor’s order.

m, agreed that a pharmacist has to verify that a med has no interactions with other meds, and will sometimes ask if a generic can be substituted (if the doc does not check the box on the scrip), etc.
However, I believe that’s a different issue than the one in the article.

A pharmacist will never ask if the RX you have from your physician is appropriate. If you were to ask him if it were he would say you’ll have to ask your doctor that question. If the box on the RX, as eastcoastlady said, isn’t checked he will ask you if you want generic as a sub.. EC is sold across the counter in some states. If the state you’re in has this law your pharmacist can give it to you. Pharmacists are very helpful about explaining drug interactions, and about herbs, and polite about any other question you may have about RX’s.

The fundamental fallacy at work here is the belief that morality can be boiled down to a neat set of do and don’t rules. Morality is the practical application of unselfish love to a given situation. Rules are inflexible. Love is.

Pardon, I meant the last sentence to read “Love is flexible.”

No person with the job of filling a legal RX has the right to tell me that he/she won’t fill it due to their “religious beliefs”. If I need a med that they disagree with, hand it to another pharmacist and have them hand me the meds. They aren’t taking the med., I am. They aren’t contributing to my actions. I choose to take the contraception, and it really is NONE of their business. If I need the morning after pill, I need it…again, none of their business. Just hand me the meds., take my money and continue to dispence the cold meds. Get out of the job if you can’t fill a legal RX.

I don’t think people should smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol. But if I worked in a grocery store and the customer was of legal age, I would not refuse to sell those items. Its not my place to make moral decisions for others.

Sell, don’t sell – it’s up to each independent pharmacist to decide what to carry and dispense. For the, don’t be surprised if your customers decide to go to a different pharmacist. Market rules.
For the pharmacists employed by a chain – you will be expected to honor the decision of your supervisors and various bosses. That’s how the game is played. Until you are in a position to make the rules, you will have to follow them. It may stink, but its how the game is played.
For the customers, shop where your conscience thinks best. It will soon be apparent which pharmacies sell contraceptives and which choose not to. Even if you are purchasing those products, that will tell you about who you are supporting by giving them your business. That’s the way the game is played
Play on!