Pharmacists' rights
Regarding legislative proposals to prohibit drug store owners from firing pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control on religious grounds (Apr. 13, Apr. 28): it is one thing for a store owner to decide not to sell a given product, which should be his or her right. However, if I owned the drug store I would like to employ pharmacists who would dispense the products I carry. After all, that is how I make my living. Can I no longer make this a condition of employment? And where does this stop? People have perfectly reasonable religious objections to all kinds of everyday items -- alcohol, tobacco, pork, shellfish, all meat, bread at certain times of the year. If I own a grocery store do I have to employ clerks who refuse to ring up, say, bacon or beer, because their religion opposes such things? -- James Ingram, Philadelphia, Pa.
Comments
It's one thing for an employer to be able to make a condition of employment that all pharmacists dispense the drugs that the owner sells. It's quite another to require that ALL pharmacists dispense them. Let the (job) market decide.
If a pharmacist won't dispense a drug, that is a simple matter of an employee refusing to perform job-required duties. He or she is then welcome to find another employer who will not make this a requirement of employment. The employer has not made any discrimination against the employee, so the employee has no cause for unjust termination.
As for the case where a customer is demanding that a pharmacy sell emergency contraception, again, let the market decide. If a customer wants that prescription and the pharmacy won't sell it, the customer is free to go to another pharmacy. If one argues that there aren't any other pharmacies nearby that sell it, then one is free to move to an area where it will be sold. Get the government out of this entire area of needless regulation!
Posted by: MickeyF | June 9, 2005 6:31 PM