Pharmacists and choices
This morning I noticed this on one my blog stops:
http://layingblames.blogspot.com/2005/05/i-like-ted-leos-pharmacists-much-more.html
This posting details well the blurring of the lines between fact and emotion in the "Pro-life vs. Pro-choice" debate.
I consider myself pro-life.
I consider myself pro-choice.
What does that mean? How can I be both?
It means that I believe life is a unique gift given to each of us from God, that there is value to God in each life (even though it may not be apparent to us), and that it should be treasured and celebrated.
It means that "all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Humans everywhere should be able to make choices about how their life is structured. I choose to have a relationship with God, enabled by His Spirit to consider His will for me and my actions. I have no problem if another chooses otherwise (although I do have sadness for this choice and pray they might reconsider). As a civil society, governed by law and common consent, we MUST be mindful another's right to choose.
If a druggist decides not to fill certain prescriptions, okay. If I own the business, I should have the right to dismiss him/her from the position, schedule him/her at certain times (and make my customers aware of his/her hours) or support the decision. The goverment does not need to meddle in the affairs of private businesses, other than the protection of rights expressly guaranteed by our constitution.
If a retail store does not stock a product I want to purchase, I must either adapt to a different item or shop elsewhere. Suppose I want Post brand Frosted Flakes, but the grocery store only carries Kellogg's brand. Should the goverment force the store to stock the Post product for me? What if they don't even carry breakfast cereal? Should they be forced to stock it for me, because the goverment has said it is part of a healthy breakfast?
C'mon people. Chill out a bit and let others be idiots if they want to be idiots.
http://layingblames.blogspot.com/2005/05/i-like-ted-leos-pharmacists-much-more.html
This posting details well the blurring of the lines between fact and emotion in the "Pro-life vs. Pro-choice" debate.
I consider myself pro-life.
I consider myself pro-choice.
What does that mean? How can I be both?
It means that I believe life is a unique gift given to each of us from God, that there is value to God in each life (even though it may not be apparent to us), and that it should be treasured and celebrated.
It means that "all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Humans everywhere should be able to make choices about how their life is structured. I choose to have a relationship with God, enabled by His Spirit to consider His will for me and my actions. I have no problem if another chooses otherwise (although I do have sadness for this choice and pray they might reconsider). As a civil society, governed by law and common consent, we MUST be mindful another's right to choose.
If a druggist decides not to fill certain prescriptions, okay. If I own the business, I should have the right to dismiss him/her from the position, schedule him/her at certain times (and make my customers aware of his/her hours) or support the decision. The goverment does not need to meddle in the affairs of private businesses, other than the protection of rights expressly guaranteed by our constitution.
If a retail store does not stock a product I want to purchase, I must either adapt to a different item or shop elsewhere. Suppose I want Post brand Frosted Flakes, but the grocery store only carries Kellogg's brand. Should the goverment force the store to stock the Post product for me? What if they don't even carry breakfast cereal? Should they be forced to stock it for me, because the goverment has said it is part of a healthy breakfast?
C'mon people. Chill out a bit and let others be idiots if they want to be idiots.
posted by Kurt at 10:10 AM
1 Comments:
I agree with you Kurt, if a woman wants the choice to stop a pregnancy or abort it depending on your definition, then she has that choice, but surely a business owner can choose his stock? Why should he have his right of free will removed because some one wants his store to sell a product? It’s like demanding my local appliance store sell cars because I don’t want to travel the store that does sell cars.
If your local pharmacy doesn’t sell the product you want then go to a store that does, it’s that easy
Post a Comment
<< Home