From the National Women’s Law Center:

Most states in the US have statutes or regulations that implicitly impose a duty on the pharmacist to dispense all legally valid and medically approved prescriptions. Three states also explicitly require pharmacists or pharmacies to ensure that valid prescriptions are filled, and other states have introduced bills to require the same. However, an increasing number of states have introduced, and some even enacted, measures that would permit pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions based on their personal beliefs.

Of course, when we say “prescriptions,” what we’re really talking about is contraception.
(Pills that help men tinky their winkies are a-ok by the Moral Majority!)

And not just any form of birth control – oh, no! – but women’s contraception.
(Hands off those condoms or the Virgin Mary gets it! Bareback.)

And when we say “women’s contraception,” we aren’t just referring to the devil’s delight that is the morning-after pill – although it is an outrage that Satan’s Little Helper isn’t yet available over-the-counter in every goddamn state! Heaven’s no! Rather, we’re lumping The Pill into this dubious blanket category as well.
(Because anything that keeps women shodden, childfree, and out of the kitchen is clearly immoral and indecent!)

Assholes.

Although, in most states, a pharmacist’s job entails, ummm, actually dispensing valid prescriptions (go fucking figure!), a number of states have decided, or at least considered, that pharmacists are entitled to be lazy, self-righteous slobs, clearly above performing the very tasks that they were hired to do in the first place. Thirteen states have introduced bills that “would permit pharmacists or pharmacies to refuse to fill prescriptions based on their personal beliefs,” and, thus far, four states have passed these sanctimonious slacker bills.

So what’s the problem? If a woman is denied her prescription by one pharmacist, she’ll just get passed off to the next one on duty, right? Worst case, she has to come back the next day. Well, not exactly.

First off, some of these bullshit laws allow entire pharmacies – not just individual pharmacists – to refuse to fill a prescription. (Hell, who am I kidding? I’ll just say it – contraceptives. After all, that’s the only type of prescription that’s being refused.) So she can just take her business elsewhere, right? Wrong again.

Of course, I strongly encourage any woman to patronize a pharmacy that doesn’t tolerate this type of bullshit from their employees. By all means, find out if any establishments near you have been sued for discrimination against morally superior Christian employees, and throw all your money at them. They deserve it.

Unfortunately, some women don’t have the luxury of a choice. If you live out in the middle of Hicksville, USA, and/or lack reliable transportation, Bob’s Groceries, Liquor, Drugs & Guns down on 1st and 4th might be your only option. If they refuse to fill your valid prescription, you’re shit out of luck. To compound the problem, Hicksville, USA, is the place most likely to allow these legal shenanigans to begin with.

Let’s turn to the town of Fabens, Texas, for a shining illustration:

Steve Mosher’s Medicine Shoppe pharmacy is inside a grocery store on one of the two main streets in this small town set amid West Texas scrub. It’s the only place where residents can locally fill their prescriptions.

Last year, Mosher decided he’d had enough. He joined the growing ranks of pharmacists refusing to dispense birth control because of moral objections.

“I’m a Christian, and I believe that abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being,” said Mosher. Because birth control pills could keep a fertilized egg from implanting, he opposes them too.

[....]

There are 6,093 licensed pharmacies in Texas and mail-order options, but it’s a big state with 199 towns that have only one drug store. And those often have only one pharmacist.

The problem can be further exacerbated because many stores, including national chains, don’t offer all forms of birth control. The morning-after pill is frequently not offered.

Wal-Mart Inc., one of the nation’s largest pharmaceutical chains, doesn’t stock it and there are 10 towns in Texas in which Wal-Mart is the only pharmacy.

Clearly, the “pharmacies” portion of the law is unfair. Yet, it’s utter BS to allow individual pharmacists to do so the same, and here’s why.

Let’s revisit Hicksville for a moment. Smaller businesses, particularly family-owned pharmacies, may only have one employee on duty at a time. Or they might have one employee, period. So allowing individuals the right of refusal would have the same effect as granting establishments that right.

Of course, I think the state would be hard-pressed to grant this “moral out” only to pharmacists who work in larger establishments, so the above argument pretty much invalidates a right of refusal for all would-be PharmaNazis.

There is, however, one overriding principle that goes straight to the heart of the matter, which NOW posed in one refreshingly simple sentence:

If dispensing birth control is so morally offensive to pharmacists, they should find another job.

Fuck yeah, sister!

Imagine, just for a moment, if Dita Von Teese scored a job at the Paradise Club, then showed up in a turtleneck and chastity belt and refused to get nekked. She’d be out on her pristine little ass before you can say “show me your tits!” As well she should be. After all, she was hired to show everyone her tits.

You don’t want to dispense prescriptions? Then you’re in the wrong profession, asshole.

- K

Originally posted @ www.kellygarbato.com/blog/2005-06-29/
Filed under: Feminism, Religion, Repro Rights, Godbaggers — Kelly @ June 29, 2005 10:05 pm

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 29th, 2005 at 10:05 pm and is filed under vintage. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.