After a three year fight, the matchmaking service,
eHarmony, has agreed to link-up homosexual couples. This bodes ill for the future. We've already seen agressive action against pro-life
pharmacists who are often punished or fired for refusing to dispense abortion drugs like RU-486. Medical personnel also face discrimination for refusing to participate in abortions. And with a new, more aggressive administration what can we expect? The force of government coming down hard on anyone who resists cooperation with the culture of death. The freedom to choose crowd has always been about coercion. No choice but their choice.
This post of yours is so wrong on so many levels.
ReplyDelete1. No comment on the eHarmony matching.
2. If pharmacists cannot in good conscious dispense medicines, they are free to choose another business or occupation. Their religious choices may affect as much as possible only their lives and not those of the general public. The drug industry like the airline industry is highly regulated and for good reasons.
3. Medical personal face discrimination? Without any specifics this is just another Catholic ‘red herring’.
4. This Catholic militancy was predicted during the visit to America by Pope Benedict. Even then President Bush knew the republicans were going to lose the election. This is a looks like a deal between Bush and the Pope because:
Where was this Catholic militancy during the Republican reign? No aggressiveness so again just politics. No concern for the unborn.
Where are the ethics needed to craft a law protecting albeit rare but medically necessary abortion? Again no concern for the unborn just politics keeping abortion as a issue for the voters with no resolution. Again politics with no concern for the unborn.
Why did the Pope not take issue with the “do everything wrong republicans” who sat around complaining but figuring out how to separate the necessary from the wrong abortions?
5. Obama aggressive? He hasn’t even taken office. What about the lazy Republicans who never drafted any legislation to separate the necessary abortions from the unnecessary and evil? Again the republicans were too busy indebting this country. They were as good at fiscal conservative as they were at making progress in blocking wrongful abortion. Again no concern for the unborn, just divisive politics.
6. Talk about coercion! The Catholic and Christian churches want to conscript the government because they have failed completely at moral leadership. If the Catholic and Christian Church were successful, 80% of abortions would never occur. Why is that? This is the same failure to lead as the Church failed responding to the sexual abuse scandal. Again the Churches are blaming everybody but themselves.
7. “The Land of the Free?” Freedom - It’s not about your freedom at all, but about your power. Power is to be able to decide something that affects others while freedom is being able to decide something which affects mostly yourself. It takes an especially convoluted and incredibly selfish and egocentric — to claim that dispensing of prescriptions to others affects you more than it does others.
If you don't know of persecuted medical people you have your head in the sand. Do the research on it yourself. There's plenty of evidence out there.
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to address all your points, just one. Your euphemistic statement about "dispensing of prescriptions" and "medicines" hides the fact that we are talking about a pill that kills people. Calling it medicine is like the Nazis calling Zyclon B a cleaning agent. (Hey, it was for ethnic cleansing right?) Hippocrates penned his oath promising his patients a new standard of treatment. "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asks for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art." Pro-life doctors, nurses, and pharmacists have a right to desire to keep their art and their lives as pure and holy as an ancient pagan. Too bad so many today don't have the same standard of morality.
You are correct. Some jurisdictions permit pharmacists to impose their religious beliefs on others. However, you must recognize by this your agreement to live not only according to your particular faith but in accordance and compliance to all other major world faiths as well as the multitude of minor faiths and sects and animal rights and transcendental groups. May Ala be with you and dispense your medicine as Ala sees fit.
ReplyDeleteIn a non regulated industry the store owner may do for the most part what they want. If they don’t want to sell Playboy etc., fine but the development, testing, approving, dispensing, manufacturing, prescribing and selling of chemicals, drugs and medicines are highly regulated and as such personal religious beliefs are very much an aggressive imposition of your or others differing religious beliefs on others. Clearly this is more a control and power issue than a moral / ethical issue because it affects others more than the pharmacist.
These pharmacists are not being disingenuous as many believe they are right. But it’s not a question here of right or wrong but religious persecution of those with differing faiths. It ranks of anarchy, mob rule and witch burning.
How does anyone know that the pharmacist is actually not being pressured by his local minister to protect his business or reputation? Ethically, this is similar like the wife who aborts her baby because of concern for her reputation. Both are doing greater wrong to protect their precious reputations. The line / wall formed by the U.S. Constitution is crossed by forcing others to practice your faith. You are arguing for freedom but with the tools used for mining power and control and with the intent of suppressing the beliefs and or rights of others.
Pharmacists take an oath and sign a code of ethics, both of which are violated by pharmacists who make their religious values more important than the religious values of their patients.
For example Codes of Ethics that are violated:
1. A pharmacist respects the autonomy and dignity of each patient.
2. A pharmacist respects the values and abilities of colleagues and other health professionals.
3. A pharmacist serves individual, community, and societal needs.
4. A pharmacist respects the values and abilities of colleagues and other health professionals.
http://www.cpha.com/Home/Governance/CodeofEthics/tabid/232/Default.aspx
http://www.uspharmd.com/pharmacist/Pharmacist_Oath_and_Code_of_Ethics.html
Maybe they should have to post outside their store “For our religious preferences, we will not serve all patients.” While you’re at it, why not have a “Whites Only” as well. What will be the next issue? “No Muslims!” What you want is a religious mob action. “No Harry Potter” or “No Obama Voters”. All you argue for is your control with out responsibility for your actions.
In short summary your position on Pharmacists’’ is remains inadequate because:
Preempting of Civil law and regulations by personal religious beliefs that affect others.
Breeching of fiduciary duties toward their patients.
Breaching pharmacists’ codes of ethics.
Forcing anyone to obey the tenants of all religious beliefs and cults.
This campaign for ‘religious freedom’ is really a power and control issue using an extreme idealistic and unthinking abortion campaign to suppress other religions.
Forcing an individual’s religious beliefs on others has nothing to do with Christian faith and more about burying weak Christian faith in absolute doctrine.
Your attempt to blame me for wanting to vet and fact checking your statements evidences a child like oversimplification and the dangerous habit of believing what ever you are told. This is what breeds your contempt toward my questions and vetting. The foundation is obviously your contempt toward the religious beliefs and needs of others unlike you.
If pharmacists are permitted to with hold than a fair trade off must necessarily be the patient be permitted to order via the internet or by phone from a neighboring county or state the medications that are being withheld for what ever reason.
ReplyDelete