Leave a comment

Comments 5

(The comment has been removed)

martygreene November 10 2004, 05:27:42 UTC
well, some states have now passed legislature that allows more druggists and doctors to be lame. grr.

Reply

strange_quark November 10 2004, 05:46:05 UTC
the counterargument here is that if one knows that his future profession will require him to engage in things that are against his conscience, shouldn't he make a decision to avoid this profession so as to avoid being unprofessional and irresponsible? i don't think that one should agree in the first place to do things that are morally repugnant to him or herself and then fail to do so.

Reply

beeporama November 10 2004, 06:31:46 UTC
I thought the same thing. For example, if you're vegetarian, don't get a job at McDonald's then refuse to sell anything but salads.

But OK, so the law's the law, and as long as it stands I hope and expect the profit motive to come into play. If you refuse to dispense a popular drug, you're costing your pharmacy money; you're probably going to have a hard time getting hired or holding a job. The article is not clear about whether the job of the pharmacist is protected, or if they can be fired for refusing to fill a prescription...

Reply


talentshow November 10 2004, 11:06:21 UTC
I can't fucking deal with that. If anyone ever did that to me, what I would do in response would make the national news.

Reply

martygreene November 10 2004, 14:14:34 UTC
Oh trust me... I'm the same way.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up