• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

1 in 5 Pharmacies Hinders Teens' Access to 'Morning-After' Pill: Study

As long as the pharmacist directs the customer to someone who WILL fill the prescription, I have no issue with an individual pharmacist acting on his morals.


Correct me if I am wrong, but if the pharmacist stocks Plan B, and the customer has a VALID perscription, they have to fill it regardless of morals.

Now, they can choose whether or not to stock Plan B, but I don't think they have the right to refuse to fill a VALID perscription. And by Valid, I mean it is confirmed with the doctor that the perscription is valid.
 
Your "opinion" on this is valueless. This is not a "public" pharmacy. A "public" pharmacy would be government run. This is owned by a private individual or company. They can choose to sell to whoever they like. They can choose to not have the medication being discussed in stock. Your argument is invalid because you are using the term "public" incorrectly.



Again, you are using the term "public" incorrectly. If the pharmacy does not want to sell that particular medication, they do not have to.



digs is right. I don't know why he didn't respond, but I did.

since when does public have to be government run? thats false

foodland isnt government run they can discriminate based on religion. Sorry thats false
I also said if they choose not to stok it thats fine :shrug:
he is wrong and my example already proved that
 
It's not discrimination. No one HAS to sell the drug if they do not want to.



We don't agree. There is no "public" pharmacy in your example. If the business decides that they will not sell BC, you're out of luck. Go elsewhere. If the pharmacist does this against company policy, complain to management. They will either insist that he sell the drug, or fire him.

it is discrimination if the choice is based on religion because you are discriminating against me based on your religion and saying the hell with mine.

could they not give me service simply because i was black, women, jewish because there is other pharmacies? the answer is no
 
it is discrimination if the choice is based on religion because you are discriminating against me based on your religion and saying the hell with mine.

could they not give me service simply because i was black, women, jewish because there is other pharmacies? the answer is no

They should be allowed to. Regardless, if a pharmacy doesn't want to sell the morning after pill, they don't have to. Their business. Don't like it? Go next door to that pharmacy. 80% of pharmacies have no issue selling this drug.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but if the pharmacist stocks Plan B, and the customer has a VALID perscription, they have to fill it regardless of morals.

Now, they can choose whether or not to stock Plan B, but I don't think they have the right to refuse to fill a VALID perscription. And by Valid, I mean it is confirmed with the doctor that the perscription is valid.


this is correct otherwise it is in fact discrimination and infringing on my rights. Anything else is dishonesty, their personal morals play no role.

If its in stock and I have a valid script and im refused that is discrimination if its based on anything other than their medical/scientific opinion. Morals are meaningless.
 
They should be allowed to. Regardless, if a pharmacy doesn't want to sell the morning after pill, they don't have to. Their business. Don't like it? Go next door to that pharmacy. 80% of pharmacies have no issue selling this drug.

should be is your opinion. some people think a public business SHOULD be able not not service or hire blacks or women etc simply based on the fact they are women or they are black but thats not how the law, this country and our rights and freedoms work thank god.
 
What rights would those be?

not to be discriminated against lol

if you discriminate against me in a public place of business based on YOUR religion you are denying me MY religion.

its simple really.

the real answer is if you dont like public rules and the rights your fellow American have dont get involved in public bushiness that the FIRST domino, we cant pick one in the midldle
 
should be is your opinion. some people think a public business SHOULD be able not not service or hire blacks or women etc simply based on the fact they are women or they are black but thats not how the law, this country and our rights and freedoms work thank god.

Yes, and that opinion does not detract from anything else I have said. Any private business should be able to discriminate as they like. If we as consumers do not like it, we do not purchase from that company. That's how it properly works if people weren't such lazy jerks that they "offshore" everything to the government.

But that's not really the issue here. No pharmacy has to sell you anything.
 
not to be discriminated against lol

if you discriminate against me in a public place of business based on YOUR religion you are denying me MY religion.

its simple really.

the real answer is if you dont like public rules and the rights your fellow American have dont get involved in public bushiness that the FIRST dominion, we cant pick one in the midldle

People are discriminated against all the time, even by government. Can't drive before 16, can't vote before 18, can't drink before 21, etc.

Those pharmacies are PRIVATE business, BTW. You don't own it, you don't pay the taxes, you don't pay the employees, you don't pay for the stock. It's not yours. You are not entitled to other people's property.
 
Which pharmacies are these? I would like to know so instead of boycotting them, I will do business with them. I personally feel the "morning after pill" should be illegal for everyone.

It is amazing, in one day on this forum we have a thread about abortion and about the death penalty. Many who argue for allowing the murder of unborn children also argue for not executing murderers. Wow, it is not ok to kill someone for the crime of taking someones life, but you support killing an unborn child for the crime of being conceived to a mother willing to kill it. In your mixed up moral world, how exactly do you justify these stances when they so obviously contridict each other?
 
Yes, and that opinion does not detract from anything else I have said. Any private business should be able to discriminate as they like. If we as consumers do not like it, we do not purchase from that company. That's how it properly works if people weren't such lazy jerks that they "offshore" everything to the government.

But that's not really the issue here. No pharmacy has to sell you anything.

uhm what I posted isnt an opinion, discrimination is currently illegal, you think it should, lots of libertarians have that opinion, you are welcome to it but luckily the country isnt run that way and the government protects are rights. You call it lazy, im thankful because america would be a lot different and worse.

also again if the pharmacies reason for not selling me a stocked item is based on religion, race, gender etc and not something scientific and medical its discrimination :shrug:
 
People are discriminated against all the time, even by government. Can't drive before 16, can't vote before 18, can't drink before 21, etc.

Those pharmacies are PRIVATE business, BTW. You don't own it, you don't pay the taxes, you don't pay the employees, you don't pay for the stock. It's not yours. You are not entitled to other people's property.


yep people are discriminated against those things you mentioned arent protected by laws rights and freedoms LMAO

Pharmicies are NOT private bushiness by discrimination laws sorry.

SPare me you opinion im talking reality.
 
Which pharmacies are these? I would like to know so instead of boycotting them, I will do business with them. I personally feel the "morning after pill" should be illegal for everyone.

It is amazing, in one day on this forum we have a thread about abortion and about the death penalty. Many who argue for allowing the murder of unborn children also argue for not executing murderers. Wow, it is not ok to kill someone for the crime of taking someones life, but you support killing an unborn child for the crime of being conceived to a mother willing to kill it. In your mixed up moral world, how exactly do you justify these stances when they so obviously contridict each other?

LMAO every time someone calls it murder I laugh because that is factually incorrect. Its dramatic hyperbole that objective people dont buy.
 
LMAO every time someone calls it murder I laugh because that is factually incorrect. Its dramatic hyperbole that objective people dont buy.

Legalized murder is what you'd agree to then?
 
Legalized murder is what you'd agree to then?

nope because there is no such thing, i dont invent words, I prefer to use words how they are defined in a dictionary otherwise its fantasy or slang.

And in such cases where I use slang words i fully admit it and im objective, rational and logical enough to understand that

abortion is in no way shape or form "murder", this is just a current fact :shrug:
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but if the pharmacist stocks Plan B, and the customer has a VALID perscription, they have to fill it regardless of morals.

Now, they can choose whether or not to stock Plan B, but I don't think they have the right to refuse to fill a VALID perscription. And by Valid, I mean it is confirmed with the doctor that the perscription is valid.

That's a good question. I think you are correct, ethically, but I'm not certain. I'd imagine if Plan B is in stock and they DON'T fill it, they could be fired.
 
since when does public have to be government run? thats false

foodland isnt government run they can discriminate based on religion. Sorry thats false
I also said if they choose not to stok it thats fine :shrug:
he is wrong and my example already proved that

I can discriminate against you based on your religion. It's my business. If I choose to not sell to Muslims/Catholics/Jews/etc... I can. Probably wouldn't be good for business, but I can refuse the right to serve anyone I want.
 
it is discrimination if the choice is based on religion because you are discriminating against me based on your religion and saying the hell with mine.

could they not give me service simply because i was black, women, jewish because there is other pharmacies? the answer is no

I can certainly do that. The government can't, and I can't HIRE based on religion (unless my business is based on religion).
 
I can discriminate against you based on your religion. It's my business. If I choose to not sell to Muslims/Catholics/Jews/etc... I can. Probably wouldn't be good for business, but I can refuse the right to serve anyone I want.

there are public rules and you will pay the price, you can not discriminate against the protected things.
I agree you can refuse service to anybody but you better have an excuse that doesnt fall under discrimination if it can be proved thats illegal.

Thats my point, I could not hire women if i choose but ill have to say they werent hired because the werent qualified, if I say i didnt hire them simply because they were black or women im screwed lol
 
I can certainly do that. The government can't, and I can't HIRE based on religion (unless my business is based on religion).

Not if its proved you cant.

Hire and service are the same discrimination in public services protects us all
 
That's a good question. I think you are correct, ethically, but I'm not certain. I'd imagine if Plan B is in stock and they DON'T fill it, they could be fired.

this was my EXACT example earlier and you disagreed LOL
 
there are public rules and you will pay the price, you can not discriminate against the protected things.
I agree you can refuse service to anybody but you better have an excuse that doesnt fall under discrimination if it can be proved thats illegal.

Quote the law I violate if I refuse to serve you because you are Catholic.

Thats my point, I could not hire women if i choose but ill have to say they werent hired because the werent qualified, if I say i didnt hire them simply because they were black or women im screwed lol

This is accurate, as I said. But this is hiring practices that are protected by federal law. I do not believe that I MUST serve anyone.
 
Not if its proved you cant.

Hire and service are the same discrimination in public services protects us all

Ummm... no. But if I'm wrong, quote the law that discusses service.
 
Back
Top Bottom