Personal Beliefs vs Morning After Pill

To return to the actual topic of this thread:

That would depend, is it a waiter that gets good tips and is popular with the customers, or does he refuse to take showers and generally make the place worse?

In other words, it would depend. Unlike you, I don't base my estimate of a man's character on a single thing, I leave that position to the bigots.

You keep trying to make this about character and morals. It's not - its about doing the job you're being paid for.

If you work in a drugstore as a cashier, your job is to ring up whatever a customer wants to buy. If you refuse to do that, you're refusing to do your job.

Same with a waiter refusing to sell things offered on the menu.

If any employee of mine refused to do the job I was paying them for, I would fire them. Simple as that.

Again, if the employer is paying them, and you don't like the job they are doing, go shop somewhere else. That ends the debate on the terms you are trying to claim you are making it on, leaving you with nothing but the desire to fire people that you do not employ simply because you don't like their opinion.
 
Do you have the right to be a sniper in the Army if your conscience, morality, and faith cause you to refuse to kill anyone?

I'm pretty sure when you join the Army, you're owned by the Army.

....otherwise, a lot of liberal socialist Democrats would have bloody noses.

Let's try this.

Do you have the right to work at a brewery, delivering alcohol, if you're a Muslim whose religion doesn't allow you to transport alcohol?

Do you think that question makes sense?
 
Let's just say you're a cashier at a pharmacy or grocery store and a customer walks up with a "Plan B One Step" abortion kit.

Then let's say your personal religious beliefs are so opposed to abortion that the idea of selling the product causes you extreme emotional distress.

1) should you have the right to refuse the sale?

2) should the company you work for accommodate your personal beliefs?

3) should the company have the right to fire you (if you refuse the sale) in this situation?

4) Should you forget what you truly believe to your soul and bend to the will of the government.?

5)...:eusa_think:


The "morning after" pill can be bought today from the shelves of most pharmacies and grocery stores, available to anyone of any age without restrictions, in a step that profoundly eases access to emergency contraception.

This simple relocation of the once-controversial "Plan B One Step" -- next to condoms, tampons and sanitary napkins, instead of behind pharmacy counters -- represents the final step in a complex decadelong legal battle to make it more easily available to women who want to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex.

'Morning after' pill goes on sale Thursday in pharmacies and grocery stores, available to anyone - San Jose Mercury News

The number one problem with your thread is that plan b is not an abortion pill. If you have a problem with abortion you should have no problem with it if you have no problem selling birth control.
And if you work in a pharmacy you should be smart enough to realize it is not an abortion pill.
 
Like I said, fantasy world.

Once you point out where someone is actually practicing human sacrifice, like Obama was actually arguing in court to keep Plan B available only with prescription, you will have a case for me supporting human sacrifice.

It was hyperbole, meant to highlight your failure of assumption.

It's pretty funny to see you continuing this, after complaining that I was assigning views to you a few posts ago.

Really?

You claim to hate the idea that women cannot buy Plan B because a hypothetical salesclerk might not want to sell it to her, yet you say nothing about the President of the United States working to make it less available.

Then you claim I support human sacrifice because I haven't spoken out against it, even though I have never been faced with the President of the United States, or anyone else, working to keep it around.

You are right about one thing, one of had a failure of assumption.

How is he working to make it less available?
 
Let's just say you're a cashier at a pharmacy or grocery store and a customer walks up with a "Plan B One Step" abortion kit.

Then let's say your personal religious beliefs are so opposed to abortion that the idea of selling the product causes you extreme emotional distress.

1) should you have the right to refuse the sale?

Yes.

2) should the company you work for accommodate your personal beliefs?

If they want to.

3) should the company have the right to fire you (if you refuse the sale) in this situation?

Yes.

4) Should you forget what you truly believe to your soul and bend to the will of the government.?

Where does the government come into play? What is the will of the government in the above scenario?

The "morning after" pill can be bought today from the shelves of most pharmacies and grocery stores, available to anyone of any age without restrictions, in a step that profoundly eases access to emergency contraception.

This simple relocation of the once-controversial "Plan B One Step" -- next to condoms, tampons and sanitary napkins, instead of behind pharmacy counters -- represents the final step in a complex decadelong legal battle to make it more easily available to women who want to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex.

Yep. So?
 
It was hyperbole, meant to highlight your failure of assumption.

It's pretty funny to see you continuing this, after complaining that I was assigning views to you a few posts ago.

Really?

You claim to hate the idea that women cannot buy Plan B because a hypothetical salesclerk might not want to sell it to her, yet you say nothing about the President of the United States working to make it less available.

Then you claim I support human sacrifice because I haven't spoken out against it, even though I have never been faced with the President of the United States, or anyone else, working to keep it around.

You are right about one thing, one of had a failure of assumption.

How is he working to make it less available?

READ THE FUCKING THREAD!

First he overturned the FDA scientific panel that recommended it be sold OTC, then he fought in court when activist sued him over the decision, and he ignored the court order when he lost. Finally, instead of complying with the order, he promulgated rules that moved it behind the counter so that people have to ask for it, and still require that anyone under an arbitrarily set age get a prescription.
 
Really?

You claim to hate the idea that women cannot buy Plan B because a hypothetical salesclerk might not want to sell it to her, yet you say nothing about the President of the United States working to make it less available.

Then you claim I support human sacrifice because I haven't spoken out against it, even though I have never been faced with the President of the United States, or anyone else, working to keep it around.

You are right about one thing, one of had a failure of assumption.

How is he working to make it less available?

READ THE FUCKING THREAD!

First he overturned the FDA scientific panel that recommended it be sold OTC, then he fought in court when activist sued him over the decision, and he ignored the court order when he lost. Finally, instead of complying with the order, he promulgated rules that moved it behind the counter so that people have to ask for it, and still require that anyone under an arbitrarily set age get a prescription.

He did fight it... But your info is out of date.

"NEW YORK — The federal government on Monday told a judge it will reverse course and take steps to comply with his order to allow girls of any age to buy emergency contraception without prescriptions."
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3418359


Typical QW, doesn't back up anything.
 
So obviously instead if READING THE FUCKING THREAD you should have made sure he had not reversed his course of action.
Idiot.
Second time today you couldn't back up something you claimed to be true
 
And not every state had required a prescription, just had to get it from the pharmacist.
 
To return to the actual topic of this thread:

You keep trying to make this about character and morals. It's not - its about doing the job you're being paid for.

If you work in a drugstore as a cashier, your job is to ring up whatever a customer wants to buy. If you refuse to do that, you're refusing to do your job.

Same with a waiter refusing to sell things offered on the menu.

If any employee of mine refused to do the job I was paying them for, I would fire them. Simple as that.

Again, if the employer is paying them, and you don't like the job they are doing, go shop somewhere else. That ends the debate on the terms you are trying to claim you are making it on, leaving you with nothing but the desire to fire people that you do not employ simply because you don't like their opinion.

I think you might be a little confused as to the perspective of what we're talking about.

My "desires" don't have anything to do with this. You keep attempting to paint my argument as an emotional one, which it isn't.

If Lumpy's hypothetical were to actually happen in my drugstore, I wouldn't care. I would have no desire for that person to be fired.

But I'm pretty sure the manager of Walgreens would care if one of their employees refused to sell a product they offered.
 
To return to the actual topic of this thread:

Again, if the employer is paying them, and you don't like the job they are doing, go shop somewhere else. That ends the debate on the terms you are trying to claim you are making it on, leaving you with nothing but the desire to fire people that you do not employ simply because you don't like their opinion.

I think you might be a little confused as to the perspective of what we're talking about.

My "desires" don't have anything to do with this. You keep attempting to paint my argument as an emotional one, which it isn't.

If Lumpy's hypothetical were to actually happen in my drugstore, I wouldn't care. I would have no desire for that person to be fired.

But I'm pretty sure the manager of Walgreens would care if one of their employees refused to sell a product they offered.

The odds are... variations of the hypothetical are happening right now.

My thought, just more unnecessary government intrusion..
 
To return to the actual topic of this thread:

Again, if the employer is paying them, and you don't like the job they are doing, go shop somewhere else. That ends the debate on the terms you are trying to claim you are making it on, leaving you with nothing but the desire to fire people that you do not employ simply because you don't like their opinion.

I think you might be a little confused as to the perspective of what we're talking about.

My "desires" don't have anything to do with this. You keep attempting to paint my argument as an emotional one, which it isn't.

If Lumpy's hypothetical were to actually happen in my drugstore, I wouldn't care. I would have no desire for that person to be fired.

But I'm pretty sure the manager of Walgreens would care if one of their employees refused to sell a product they offered.

You keep trying to make yourself look smarter than everyone else. This time, you are failing misreably.

I have never said your argument was emotional, probably because I never though it raised itself far enough to have any emotion behind it. Your argument is based on the assumption that people have the right to force businesses to comply with their whims, as such, it is completely irrational.


Simple fact, you personal belief about what the manager might want is not based on the reality that the employee is actually employed at Walgreen's. I know for a fact that Walgreen's has an employee training program, and that the duties of the employee is spelled out to them as part of that training. They have an opportunity to object to anything during that training, and are able to stuff like selling Plan B during this period, and if they still end up working there it is because the company has elected to accommodate their choice.

That training program is even more extensive for the managers. They have to understand that, unlike the drooling idiots on message boards, their personal belief that people should be forced to ignore the personal right of each employee to negotiate conditions of employment and company policy only works in fanatasyland.
 
How is he working to make it less available?

READ THE FUCKING THREAD!

First he overturned the FDA scientific panel that recommended it be sold OTC, then he fought in court when activist sued him over the decision, and he ignored the court order when he lost. Finally, instead of complying with the order, he promulgated rules that moved it behind the counter so that people have to ask for it, and still require that anyone under an arbitrarily set age get a prescription.

He did fight it... But your info is out of date.

"NEW YORK — The federal government on Monday told a judge it will reverse course and take steps to comply with his order to allow girls of any age to buy emergency contraception without prescriptions."
Obama Plan B Decision: Feds To Comply With NY Judge's Ruling


Typical QW, doesn't back up anything.

My info is not out of date, the judge ordered the FDA to make it available without a prescription regardless of age, the Obama order ignored that and still requires a prescription for girls under 14. (I think that is the age.)
 
So obviously instead if READING THE FUCKING THREAD you should have made sure he had not reversed his course of action.
Idiot.
Second time today you couldn't back up something you claimed to be true

You didn't even read the post where I told you to READ THE FUCKING THREAD! I made it perfectly clear in that post that Obama backed down from his original insistence that the scientists were wrong there when he allowed it to be sold behind the counter without a prescription.

By the way, the judge ordered the FDA to treat it like any other OTC drug, which would mean it could be sold to anyone who walks into a 7-11 and buys it.
 
And not every state had required a prescription, just had to get it from the pharmacist.

That was even dumber than you trying to argue that I didn't say that Obama changed his position.

The federal government, which has the power to throw pharmacists in prison, required that anyone buying Plan B obtain a prescription before they purchase it. States do not have the authority to require pharmacists to ignore federal law, so even if a state tried to allow Plan B to be sold without a prescription, no pharmacist would obey that law unless they were willing to go to prison, and lose their livelihood.
 
And not every state had required a prescription, just had to get it from the pharmacist.

That was even dumber than you trying to argue that I didn't say that Obama changed his position.

The federal government, which has the power to throw pharmacists in prison, required that anyone buying Plan B obtain a prescription before they purchase it. States do not have the authority to require pharmacists to ignore federal law, so even if a state tried to allow Plan B to be sold without a prescription, no pharmacist would obey that law unless they were willing to go to prison, and lose their livelihood.

No they didn't.

I bought it without a prescription from my doctor two years ago. I went the the pharmacy, told him I needed it, then paid for it and left.
You are a moron.
"The FDA originally approved the morning after pill at the end of the Clinton administration in 1999 and, in 2006, it was approved for nonprescription use for women 18 and older"
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/30/fda-approves-sale-of-plan-b-morning-after-pill-to-teenagers/

Get your facts straight moron.
 
READ THE FUCKING THREAD!

First he overturned the FDA scientific panel that recommended it be sold OTC, then he fought in court when activist sued him over the decision, and he ignored the court order when he lost. Finally, instead of complying with the order, he promulgated rules that moved it behind the counter so that people have to ask for it, and still require that anyone under an arbitrarily set age get a prescription.

He did fight it... But your info is out of date.

"NEW YORK — The federal government on Monday told a judge it will reverse course and take steps to comply with his order to allow girls of any age to buy emergency contraception without prescriptions."
Obama Plan B Decision: Feds To Comply With NY Judge's Ruling


Typical QW, doesn't back up anything.

My info is not out of date, the judge ordered the FDA to make it available without a prescription regardless of age, the Obama order ignored that and still requires a prescription for girls under 14. (I think that is the age.)

Re-read my post you quoted, idiot.
 
Are you going to make the argument now that pharmacists can write prescriptions?
Plus there is the whole fact any time you go to planned parenthood they give you samples..... Without a prescription.
 
And not every state had required a prescription, just had to get it from the pharmacist.

That was even dumber than you trying to argue that I didn't say that Obama changed his position.

The federal government, which has the power to throw pharmacists in prison, required that anyone buying Plan B obtain a prescription before they purchase it. States do not have the authority to require pharmacists to ignore federal law, so even if a state tried to allow Plan B to be sold without a prescription, no pharmacist would obey that law unless they were willing to go to prison, and lose their livelihood.

No they didn't.

I bought it without a prescription from my doctor two years ago. I went the the pharmacy, told him I needed it, then paid for it and left.
You are a moron.
"The FDA originally approved the morning after pill at the end of the Clinton administration in 1999 and, in 2006, it was approved for nonprescription use for women 18 and older"
FDA Approves Sale of Plan B Morning After Pill to Teenagers | LifeNews.com

Get your facts straight moron.

Interesting argument, you went to a doctor and got a prescription, but didn't have a prescription.

The fact is that the FDA approved non prescription sale of Plan B, and was overruled by Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Someone finally sued demanding that the FDA follow the recommendation of the FDA scientists, and Obama fought against it.

He lost, which your earlier post pointed out.

Want tot ell me again how stupid I am?

Why not, for once, simply admit I know what I am talking about? If you get over you pathological need to prove me wrong every time I post, even when I agree with you, you might find yourself a lot less conflicted.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top