Another assault on religious freedom, in my home state

[Jay74]

The Right of Conscience
Albert Mohler

Should pharmacists be required to dispense so-called “emergency contraceptives” even if it violates their deepest convictions? That’s no longer a hypothetical question, as Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich recently issued an executive rule requiring all pharmacies in his state to fill a woman’s prescription for the “morning-after pill.” The governor’s “emergency order” comes with the force of law, and means that pharmacists who refuse to fill these prescriptions can face sanctions and can lose their jobs and professional status.

If pharmacists can be denied a right of conscience, what about other citizens? How long will it be before hospitals will be required to offer abortions, even if this violates moral convictions of sponsoring bodies, including churches? If a right of conscience can be denied to pharmacists, how long will it be before physicians lose the same protection?

Watch closely. It’s the pharmacists whose rights are on the line today. Who’s next?

Albert Mohler is the host of The Albert Mohler Program.

Read Albert Mohler’s blog on crosswalk.com

 

[miguel]

Jay74:

Should pharmacists be required to dispense so-called “emergency contraceptives” even if it violates their deepest convictions?

Hell no. This is getting crazy.

 

[Jay74]

miguel:

Hell no. This is getting crazy.

Absolutely.

“Emergency contraceptive” is fictional. First, it’s like saying “emergency hair cut”, considering log har would never constitute an immediate health emergency. Second, the morning after pill isn’t a contraceptive, it’s abortion.

I’m glad I voted against him.

 

[miguel]

Jay74:

Absolutely.

“Emergency contraceptive” is fictional. First, it’s like saying “emergency hair cut”, considering log har would never constitute an immediate health emergency. Second, the morning after pill isn’t a contraceptive, it’s abortion.

I’m glad I voted against him.

I think there is a similar bill being proposed in my state. I’m surprised you beat us to it.

 

[Penny_Plain]

People certainly may have legitimate moral objections to doing this. Those people should not become pharmacists, just as people who have a legitimate moral objection to shooting at other people should not join the Army.

It’s not like it’s a recent development that pharmacies dispense contraceptives. It’s been going on for, what, 35 years? I know at least one state is considering a bill that would allow pharmacists to decline to dispense any contraceptives at all.

 

[urbana]

Since you chose to compare them to soldiers, I will extend the analogy in order to make it appropriate. Soldiers are expected to obey orders and kill people. However, court rulings (Nuremburg Trials, etc.) have found that blindly obeying orders does not releave them of responsibility. Soldiers have the right, and in fact the responsibility to disobey orders that would constitute crimes against humanity. If an individual told you that he will refuse any order that would require him to commit crimes against humanity, would you tell him that since he will refuse certain orders, he should not become a soldier? In fact, you wouldn’t want individuals who state they will follow any order, even slaughtering innocent civilians, to be soldiers, would you?

Do not pharmacists have the same rights and responsibilities? Dispensing medicine that kills people constitutes a crime against humanity, such as dispensing expired medicine. Most people recognize that life begins at conception. Therefore, pharmacists can reasonably consider dispensing emergency contraception, which according to FDA statements can result in the death of embryos, to constitute a crime against humanity. Therefore, we should not be trying to push these individuals out of pharmacies, but seek them out and recruit them, based on the logic above. These are the individuals who can be trusted to dispense medicine in the interests of their patients.

 

[Franze]

This emergency contraceptive is an abortive and the right of concience is the most important right. They are being like Hitler.

 

[Jay74]

Penny Plain:

People certainly may have legitimate moral objections to doing this. Those people should not become pharmacists, just as people who have a legitimate moral objection to shooting at other people should not join the Army.

I respectfully disagree. A lot of good are done by pharmicists, doctors, soldiers, and people in may professions. I think it would be a disaster for society if every time there was a potential that you may be asked to do something that would go against your conscience you do not join a good profession–that opens up all professions, especially those who need people with morals, to being filled only by those without conscience.

Under that logic, it seems Hitler would qualify for almost anything, but Jesus couldn’t be a pharmicist or teacher because someone might ask Him to do something He doesn’t agree with.

You seem like a decent person. I’m certain this is not what your intention was. Perhaps an unintended side-effect of a seemingly logical belief.

Blessings to you.