Should A Privately Owned Business Be Forced to Offer Abortion-Related Services? I am a non-religious pro-lifer. If I owned a pharmacy and refused to carry certain products, what right would the government have in scolding me? Or suppose I owned an insurance company. Should I be penalized for refusing to cover abortions?
What you stock in your shop is up to you, locally we have three pharmacists, two stock the morning after pill, one does not .. the one that doesn't offers advice to any person seeking an abortion, as do the other two. The one shop owner is a pro-life person who offers advice on alternatives to abortion .. however he doesn't judge the woman if she chooses to carry through with the abortion. While he may disagree with the law, he doesn't try to enforce his stance onto others. Again, if you own an insurance company what you insure is up to you - though it would cut down you client base a bit The government should not be allowed to enforce what a person stocks or sells in a private business .. a publicly owned business is a different matter.
Well, "private " businesses have to serve any race.....they can't discriminate on the basis of skin color or ethnic origins....I don't know why they'd be allowed to discriminate against women...sexism is just as evil as racism... I wonder if these shop owners give advice to anyone else...like do they do consultations(advice) on lung cancer, heart problems, use of Viagra ???
Actually they don't, well not in the UK anyway, a shop owner can refuse service to any person without having to give reason . .not sure if thats the case in the US. They do give advice on a number of things, including smoking, drug use, and yes viagra as well. However this is pretty moot as the shop owner is the one who decides what they will stock and sell in their shop, regardless of their stance on anything.
In the US a shop/restaurant owner cannot discriminate because of race...as it should be. And they're idiots if they survey every item they sell to see if they find it personally offensive or not. Do pharmacists in the UK put up lists of what they won't sell due to their personal beliefs.....or is the list too short to bother?
Not my point, the shop owner in the UK doesn't have to give any reason why they choose not to serve someone, if they were to say to a person .. "i'm not serving you because you are black, gay or whatever" they would be prosecuted .. however if they say "I'm sorry sir I do not wish to serve you, please leave" nothing can or will be done, they are the owner, it is their property, it is up to them who they allow into it. The person refused services can try to prove it was done on racial or other grounds, but unless the shop keeper has actually used words to the effect it would be impossible to prove. I only know the reason why that one guy won't do the morning after pill because he is a friend, I may not agree with him, but again it is his choice. No list are put up, if someone asks for something that they don't sell, they are simply told it is not an item they stock . .afterall they can't stock everything can they.
I wasn't arguing your point, I was stating what the situation is in the US. And, no, I never said they should stock everything, I asked about items they personally found offensive knowing well that it would be a purposely short, very short, list...directed at only one sex about one item....... But , in all fairness, they should put up that list so intelligent women who want an intelligent pharmacist will know to go elsewhere...for everything..
The morning-after pill, Plan B, is not an abortifacient; it is a contraceptive. It works by slowing or suppressing ovulation before fertilization. It is crucial that it be used as soon as possible after intercourse, however, so pharmacists who refuse to dispense it may actually be contributing to abortions.
I know that . .but its down to choice . .not defending him or attacking him, its his shop in the end.
I think any business that refuses to dispense some drugs should be required to prominently display a sign reading, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone on the grounds of conscience or religious objection." It would save customers valuable time and embarrassment, and I would know which businesses to boycott for all of my needs.
They should ..... They should have the courage to put out their beliefs where everyone could see them....sounds a lot more honest to me....but then these "moral" people are neither courageous nor honest.
No. There are no laws requiring any private enterprise to sell any specific product or service related to women's reproductive systems / rights. However, insurance regulations can require basic coverages, either federally or at state level. So if you offer insurance to employees, of course the policies you would choose from would have those coverages at a minimum. And as for special allowances made to the Catholic Church, if brought up before the Court (Supreme), I doubt it would hold up. They would have to give all employers the option of picking and choosing individual coverages they like paying for, for whatever reason. And that gets pretty inefficient, and of course undermines the effort to develop national policies that improve access as well as lower costs, overall. So while the Catholic Church is no doubt anxious to be in the news about anything other than preists preying on children, it's patently riduculous for them to demand laws be altered to fit their religious belief. The freedom of (and from) religion they might think they do not need to cherish today might be something they'll miss when and if Catholics are no longer large in numbers
