Pharmacist Refusing To Fill Birth Contro l Scripts

“Sarge, my question was a legitimate one. If people are producing the same result and the only difference is the fact that one group in question represents a group of business interests and the other does not, then this little red flag goes up in my head...”

“"That's true, Mark-O. The tossing around of terminology (and the extreme left is as guilty of this as anyone) has become meaningless. The liberal label has been misapplied so often, it's downright trite. Same thing with with the left's terms of endearment..." -- Treebeard

From now on we won't use words that most people understand. Let's try using pictures from now on.

Youand we just need to find a way to better communicate.”

“Tree - The word you are not getting is "freedom".

The store owner has the freedom to sell what he wants and the customer has the right to shop elsewhere - That's capitalism.

In your example, the store owner is forced to sell what other people want and the customer gets the same exact product no matter where they shop - That's socialism.”

“What's it called when public outcry (not government legislation) pressures the capitalist owner of the store to require the said idiot to sell the medication a doctor has prescribed?”

“There's a fine line here and it gets into arguing semantics. The net result is still the same! All the spin in the world can't change the fact that if enough of those chain store owners got together, they could (hypothetically) prevent a person from filling that prescription. You can't post a definition and then impose boundaries on it to suit your point.”

“Treebeard - And that's what is so great about capitalism!!

If there is a demand, somebody will step up to fill it.

You're dealing in unrealistic hypotheticals dude.

"If" enough chain stores ... it won't happen dude, and if it does, it's because the not enough people are buying the product.

You don't have a God given right to donuts, birth control or jet fuel, but you do have a God given right to freedom.

Hallelujah!

- at least in this country so far ... but you're working hard to diminish that
last edited: 6/23/05 9:38:56 AM”

“Sarge, you have yet to tell us where public outcry without government involvement equates to socialism?”

“I don’t think Treebeard’s hypothetical situation is completely impossible (it’s unlikely but not impossible). Suppose Walgreens’ became a monopoly, so all drug stores were Walgreens. I doubt this would happen, but one only needs to look at the late 19th and early 20th centuries to see examples of markets that were monopolized or at least close to have been monopolized.”

“Phaedrus - Since you're obviously too lazy to read up on "socialism", I'll provide you the rest of the 1st paragraph from wikipedia.

In application, however, the de facto meaning of socialism has evolved and branched to a great degree, and though highly politicized, is strongly related to the establishment of an organized working class, created through either revolution or social evolution, with the purpose of building a classless society. It has also, increasingly, become concentrated on social reforms within modern democracies. This concept and the term Socialist also refer to a group of ideologies, an economic system, or a state that exists or has existed.

Class dismissed.”

“The teacher sucks! :)~~
last edited: 6/23/05 9:51:42 AM”

“lumberzac - We have laws to prevent that in the mid-late 20th century and early 21st.”

“Teaching you basic terminology isn't my job Treebeard.”

“huh?”

“"huh?" - Treebeard

Yeah ... maybe it's the student, not the teacher.”

“Sorry, the joke was lost on me, Teach!”

“It wasn't a joke.”

“Whatever...

If it was an insult, then you know what you can do with it!”

““lumberzac - We have laws to prevent that in the mid-late 20th century and early 21st.”
Sarge
10:51:34 AM
6/23/05
ignore this user

That is true, but supposes Walgreens buys a few officials to look the other way or get those laws change.

The likelihood of this happening is very slim and I don't believe it would actually happen, but it is good to at least try and foresee potential problems. No system is perfect and it is best to try and correctly fix small problems early rather than to assume the problems will fix themselves.”

“Wasn't an insult either.”

“lumberzac - We have other laws for that. It's been looked at.”

“It's coming to something when the lecturer has no idea of even the basic principles he talks of. I think a refund of tuition fees is needed.”

“It's being looked at, Y2!”

“Tell that to wikipedia.

Here's your chance to teach me.

Define for me "socialism" and "capitalism".”

“[jeapardy music plays]”

“Socialism, economic and social doctrine, political movement inspired by this doctrine, and system or order established when this doctrine is organized in a society. The socialist doctrine demands state ownership and control of the fundamental means of production and distribution of wealth, to be achieved by reconstruction of the existing capitalist or other political system of a country through peaceful, democratic, and parliamentary means. The doctrine specifically advocates nationalization of natural resources, basic industries, banking and credit facilities, and public utilities. It places special emphasis on the nationalization of monopolized branches of industry and trade, viewing monopolies as inimical to the public welfare. It also advocates state ownership of corporations in which the ownership function has passed from stockholders to managerial personnel. Smaller and less vital enterprises would be left under private ownership, and privately held cooperatives would be encouraged.”

“Is that off the top of your head y2?”

““lumberzac - We have other laws for that. It's been looked at.”
Sarge
11:07:59 AM
6/23/05
ignore this user

Wouldn't these laws be considered socialist in nature or in the very least prevent the market to perform in a free nature?
last edited: 6/23/05 10:32:19 AM”

“y2 - You left out the part from your source that that is the "centrist" position.”

“lumberzac - Laws that prevent bribary of a government body are socialist? I don't think so.

Do you?
last edited: 6/23/05 10:33:46 AM”

““lumberzac - Laws that prevent bribary of a government body are socialist? I don't think so.”
Sarge
11:31:34 AM
6/23/05
ignore this user

You're right. I ment to to paste this quote:

“lumberzac - We have laws to prevent that in the mid-late 20th century and early 21st.”
Sarge
10:51:34 AM
6/23/05
ignore this user

Which was in response to my statement about monopolies.
last edited: 6/23/05 10:35:44 AM”

“These are the tenets of the Socialist party of the U.S., the Labour party of Britain, and labor or social democratic parties of various other countries. Therefore they constitute the centrist position held by most socialists. Immediately below first extract.
That first paragraph IS the centerist postion.

Following on

Some political movements calling themselves socialist, however, insist on the complete abolition of the capitalist system and of private profit, and at the other extreme are socialist programs having objectives entailing even fewer changes in the social order than those outlined above. The ultimate goal of ALL socialists, however, is a classless cooperative commonwealth in every nation of the world.[/
last edited: 6/23/05 10:36:33 AM”

“lumberzac - Yes, I've always argued against banning monopolies. The only issue I have with a monopoly (and maybe this goes without saying) is if they attaint the monopoly status through illegal means (ie - bribary, unethical procedures, etc.) There are many laws we have that I disagree with, yet live by.”

“y2 - Correct. And that fits my definition perfectly. Maybe you are confusing "cooperative commonwealth" with government?”

“Sarge, you're either trolling or an utter moron to apply the term socialist to the scenario I described.

Actually, you might be both.”

“If this was so, we could as easily apply the term socialist to those who picket abortion clinics, sign petitions to have offensive material removed from broadcasts, or boycott anything.”

“So define it then.”

“Phaedrus - Like I mentioned previously, I do not have a problem with people boycotting the company.

Did you read that part?

The problem comes about when people try to force other people to sell things they don't want to sell.”

““lumberzac - Yes, I've always argued against banning monopolies. The only issue I have with a monopoly (and maybe this goes without saying) is if they attaint the monopoly status through illegal means (ie - bribary, unethical procedures, etc.) There are many laws we have that I disagree with, yet live by.”
Sarge
11:37:57 AM
6/23/05
ignore this user

I respect that, I don't agree with it, as I don't think monopolies should be allowed because when they exist the freedom to choose is lost, but that’s my opinion on the matter and not yours. Thanks for posting you opinion on this matter. It’s good to see someone else’s view besides my own.”

“Thank you.”

“Force as in government legislation? Because I discarded that idea specifically

“What's it called when public outcry (not government legislation) pressures the capitalist owner of the store to require the said idiot to sell the medication a doctor has prescribed?”
Phaedrus
7:34:02 AM
6/23/05

Or force as in band together and refuse to buy... wait, that's a boycott, ain't it?

What the hell ARE you against, dullard?”

“Whose freedom do YOU want to limit, Sarge?”

“Phaedum - I'm all for that.

I also have addressed this previously and said that others will likely shop at that store because they refuse to sell the products.

I'm all for that. I said that more than once now.

I don't have a problem with public "pressure".

Let me remind you of the very first post in this thread.

I'll repost the end of it just for you:

And that brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. Do you support legislation that would require pharmacists, irrespective of their moral and religious beliefs, to fill all prescriptions, yes or no?

any thoughts on this. IMO I think they should have to fill the prescriptions. - Ewker”

“Socialist.”

“You back to reality yet Phaedrus?

hello!

Go run and hide now.”

“By your own definition, you're a socialist.”

“Prove it.”

“The muslim cashier at the convenience store refused to sell me cigarettes and bacon.”

“Gotta be 18 to buy cigarettes.

Sorry V.
last edited: 6/23/05 11:08:33 AM”

“And that brings us to the subject of our poll tonight. Do you support legislation that would require pharmacists, irrespective of their moral and religious beliefs, to fill all prescriptions, yes or no?

any thoughts on this. IMO I think they should have to fill the prescriptions. - Ewker”
Sarge
10:57:49 AM
6/23/05


sarge, I think that the pharmacist should have to fill the prescription. It is his job to do. If I was the owner of a drug store and the pharmacist refused to fill scrips for BC pills because of his religious beliefs he would have to find another job or do his job correctly.

I don't think the gov't should pass legislation saying the store has to sell them. Lots of stores will sell and will continue to sell BC pills. The store that refuses will suffer in the long run. BC pills are a big business.

Now what if I fire the guy for not doing his job because of religious beliefs. Can he file a lawsuit against me for firing him for his religious beliefs? I don't think it would happen but then again I never thought a woman would get millions because she dropped coffee in her lap.”

“Sarge, would you defend the right to refuse service to a black man if a sign clearly stated that a place was whites only?

What if the proprietor were a member of the "Christian Identity Church", and serving a black man was against his religion?”