posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 09:21 AM
Eckerd Corp. said the pharmacist considered it a violation of morals to give a rape victim, with a valid prescription, a pill that would prevent her
from getting pregnant due to the sexual assault
woah! what kind of morals does this guy have? if he thinks its wrong to give the morning after pill to a woman who doesnt want to get pregnant from
nonconsentual sex what he say to those who DO have consentual sex and want the pill? i'm not so sure i want the answer. its one thing when you do
it willingly but to be forced into having sex and then someone tells you "sorry i dont think it would be moral for me to help you prevent having the
baby of a rapist" is UNACCEPTABLE. period. full stop. end of discussion.
one's own set of morals should not and must not be a part of the process. they are there to dispense drugs to those with prescriptions, not to force
their own set of values standards and morals onto others.
i'd also like to know how he was "disciplined". anything short of being fired and being unable to get a job filling out prescriptions wouldnt be
THIS IS REALLY PISSING ME OFF!!
fcking men, well people.. think they can judge and decide what is right for a woman. screw them. screw them all!
women do it to men by eliminating them from the decision making process. i'm not looking for an argument but it takes TWO to create the situation
but this is for another thread another day, not this one.
what he did was wrong, almost as bad as the guy who raped her. insult to injury, kicking her when she was down.