HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Health Illinois cannot ma...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:24 PM

Health Illinois cannot make pharmacists give 'morning after' pill: court

Source: Reuters

Health Illinois cannot make pharmacists give 'morning after' pill: court
By Mary Wisniewski
Reuters
6:18 p.m. CDT, September 21, 2012

CHICAGO (Reuters) - An Illinois appellate court Friday affirmed a lower court finding that the state cannot force pharmacies and pharmacists to sell emergency contraceptives - also known as "morning after pills" - if they have religious objections.

In 2005, former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich mandated that all pharmacists and pharmacies sell "Plan B," the brand name for a drug designed to prevent pregnancy following unprotected sex or a known or suspected contraceptive failure if taken within 72 hours.

Some anti-abortion advocates object to the drugs, which work by preventing the release of an egg, preventing fertilization or stopping a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.

In 2011, an Illinois judge entered an injunction against the rule, finding no evidence that the drugs had ever been denied on religious grounds, and that the law was not neutral since it was designed to target religious objectors.



Read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-rt-us-usa-illinois-contraceptionbre88k1d1-20120921,0,1239339.story

19 replies, 3740 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Health Illinois cannot make pharmacists give 'morning after' pill: court (Original post)
Judi Lynn Sep 2012 OP
MsPithy Sep 2012 #1
freshwest Sep 2012 #10
jonesgirl Sep 2012 #2
Judi Lynn Sep 2012 #5
McCamy Taylor Sep 2012 #3
GreenPartyVoter Sep 2012 #7
kestrel91316 Sep 2012 #4
freshwest Sep 2012 #11
uppityperson Sep 2012 #6
DallasNE Sep 2012 #8
freshwest Sep 2012 #12
kiranon Sep 2012 #9
freshwest Sep 2012 #13
waddirum Sep 2012 #17
defacto7 Sep 2012 #14
sakabatou Sep 2012 #15
judesedit Sep 2012 #16
uppityperson Sep 2012 #19
davsand Sep 2012 #18

Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:33 PM

1. Fuck NO!

The pharmacist's freedom of religion means he/she does not, personally, have to use contraception if it is against his/her religion. And that, is where that freedom ends! They do not get to force their religious dogma on their customers.

If freedom of religion does not begin and end with the individual, it does not exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MsPithy (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:46 PM

10. +1,000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:39 PM

2. Why don't they just go after the source...

sperm!!! Are they gonna start advocating for men to stop masturbating because its killing a possible life? Hmmmm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonesgirl (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:30 PM

5. Maybe outlaw saying no to men if asked on dates, in case they might be liable

to impregnate someone.

Then, ban being unpleasant to any man in case he might later consider impregnating someone!

That ought to do it, and show those "Feminazis" at the same time, just the way Republicans would want it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:46 PM

3. Easy fix. Let doctors sell drugs. All drugs. Say they have to because pharmacists are putting

the public in danger by refusing to dispense drugs that a doctor has recommended or prescribed. When Illinois pharmacists discover that they have to compete with doctors, they will suddenly be more than happy to provide the public with whatever it wants. Greed will trump religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to McCamy Taylor (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:04 PM

7. Interesting suggestion, but I bet there are some docs who also side with those pharmacists. :^(

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:12 PM

4. Ok, fine. Sue them for wrongful birth and 18 years of child support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #4)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:47 PM

11. Hell-yeah!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:41 PM

6. All it is is a certain amount/dosage of birth control pills. I wonder if they sell them or can not?

To hell with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:15 PM

8. I Don't Understand This Ruling At All

When a legal drug cannot be purchased then the patient is being denied a medical option that is completely legal. It seems to me that if a pharmacist refused to sell a product in inventory that it should be grounds for firing for cause rather than supported by a court of law. Frankly, I would have thought the pharmacist would have signed an oath to dispense all legal drugs for which a party had a legal prescription. This ruling looks to violate the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment where the pharmacist is establishing his/her religion over the customer. Like I say, I can see no legal basis for such a ruling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #8)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:50 PM

12. Also infering with the practice of medicine by an MD, a pharmacist isn't qualified to prescribe.

What is the pill is for some other medical reason. In any case, it's NYOB to the guy selling stuff. In a small town, this could mean the difference between a 'miscarriage' and a surgical abortion, which the pharmacist is likewise not qualified to perform. This is sick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:30 PM

9. This is bad law. What if the pharmacist wouldn't sell to mormons, gays,

atheists, Catholics, Buddhists, people under 6 feet tall, whites/non whites/blacks/latinos/Aborigines/and so on based on religious beliefs. Who gets to pick and choose which religious beliefs are "sincere" enough to get the protection of the law? Why isn't this religious entanglement by the government/court? Pharmacists should dispense all legal drugs or find another occupation. This is a nonsense law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kiranon (Reply #9)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:52 PM

13. Yes, I'm gonna start a religion saying all their stuff is mine. Get ready, bozos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kiranon (Reply #9)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 10:08 AM

17. The law (signed by Blago) was good law

The Court's overturning of that law is what's bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:58 AM

14. Well, Which is it?

"finding no evidence that the drugs had ever been denied on religious grounds, and that the law was not neutral since it was designed to target religious objectors. "

If the drugs had never been denied on religious grounds, how could there be religious objectors to target? If it was designed to target religious objectors, how could that mean that there never would be any religious objectors? AND how could there be denials on religious grounds if there was a law in force that said they couldn't object? Ambiguous much?

Now there will be denials based on religious objections, count on it. What a revolving door this is.

Don't serve in public health if you can't deliver it. Damn your religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:12 AM

15. More anti-women BS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:50 AM

16. Who cares? Find another pharmacy. I'm sure many supporters of the morning-after pill will, too.

These right wing evangelical hypocrites crack me up. They SAY they don't want women to have abortions....yet they are doing everything in their power to make the abortions necessary. If they would keep it in their pants, there wouldn't be an issue, would there? I say make the fathers of the children in question raise the kids themselves. I'll bet abortion would be legal before we could blink an eye. They want the fun, but not the responsibility. As has been shown, these horny bastards are the biggest users of porn and prostitutes. Let's show these sex-fiends, ladies. There are pharmacies on every corner. Who needs these fakes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to judesedit (Reply #16)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:33 PM

19. Maybe there are pharmacies on every corner where you live, but not in many rural areas of Illinois.

Yes, some places this won't make much of a difference, but other places it will. Forcing women to give birth then give up the child to the father will make abortions legal? What. The. Fuck?

This is about the morning after pill, not about abortions. Which are already legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 11:37 AM

18. If the state can't FORCE every pharmacy to carry EC, can they choose not to do business with some?

Seems to me that if the state can't force anybody to sell EC, then maybe the state could say that any pharmacy that doesn't choose to carry and dispense ALL drugs is unsafe/immoral/unethical and therefore unworthy of getting ANY state money...

If they don't want to be responsible pharmacies I don't want MY tax money going to them.




Laura

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread