Disney Vs Georgia

[Plane]

But would this law allow a pharmacy to deny life saving meds for religious reasons.

Where the government is convinced that the religious reason is genuine , the otherwise forbidden Peyote cactus is allowed to be consumed as a psychoactive religious rite.

What religion requires that lifesaving be withheld?

Where a particular drug has a dual use , is it prescribed as for its use?

Is there really a big problem with birth control being difficult to obtain?

Suppose a patient had a prescription for a deadly dose of something, is a pharmacist not required to intervene?

Well, euthanasia is slowly approaching legality , and just in time , pharmacists are loosing the right to refuse to participate.

[kimba1]

Medication in general can be very difficult to get from pharmacy.

Not really sure in matters of euthanasia it would be an issue for pharmatist at all. Remember lethal injection is getting difficult to do and that's not even supplied by pharmatist. I think presently walgreens is dealing with pain meds and withholding them to customers now despite having doctors prescription.

Certain birth control has been used to treat endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrone.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The governor has vetoed the Georgia Religious Bigots protection act. So Disney will not boycott Georgia. This does not mean that Gladstone Gander will marry Donald or that Goofy will propose to Pluto, though.

[sirs]

Not to menion, no one has ever claimed or even inferred such, Dr Deflection     

[Xavier_Onassis]

Deflect yourself, sirs.

[sirs]

Naaa....I'll just keep highlighting your transparent efforts

[kimba1]

I remember the sandra fluke case which her friend got denied medication think it's being used for bc and resulted in her losing one of her overies and other complications.

[sirs]

You;ll have to provide more detail Kimba.  One doesn't automatically beget the other

[kimba1]

The topic here is denial of service for religious reason and i cited sandra fluke case about a birth control medication that was denied and result in a person getting serious health problems and lose the ability to give birth.

I'm just using this as an example of possible outcome if religious based denial of service. I personally would prefer a business publicly inform it so not to risk harm. I remember a earlier case which a pharmacy refuse to return a prescription saying it did not want the person to fill it elsewhere for moral reasons.

[sirs]

Well the tangent you brought up is that the denal of BC led directly to some emergent situation that left someone without their ovaries, specifically due to them not getting BC.  What I'd like to see is some specifics that not getting BC led to this.  Knowing some about the medical profession, I'm having a hard time seeing how the 2 are connected

[kimba1]

The bc meds was not prescribed for bc but for something else but the insurance would not cover it thinking it was for bc only.

[kimba1]

Im just using this as an example of a possible faith based denial of service.

http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/blog/how-an-unscrupulous-birth-control-policy-cost-one-woman-her-ovary/


I only remember this for unrelated reason because sandra fluke got verbally unsulted for this matter and the focus went to her instead of the topic

[Xavier_Onassis]

I was not actually serious about Goofy and Pluto, or Gladstone Gander, who only LOOKS like he's gay. I am sorry if this upset your preconceptions about them.

[sirs]

The bc meds was not prescribed for bc but for something else but the insurance would not cover it thinking it was for bc only.

Having skimmed over the article Kimba, the BC pills in question were a "prophylactic" prescription, as in they were recommended but not a requirement.  Nor was she denied from purcahsing them herself.  For example, I suffer migraines....I have for decades now.  Nothing worked.  Then came Imitrex.  Miracle medication when I got my 1st shot of it.  And even with a prescription, they were dreadfully expensive.  I did what i had to do to buy them.  I didn't sue anyone.  I didn't take this to congress, even though it was precsely and the only medication that could deal with my migraines.  And they weren't prophylactic either.  Point being, she could have switched insurances, or worst case scenario, asked her family to help pay for them, until she got under an insurance plan that would cover them

Now, could Georgetown have considered a specific exemption, since it wasn't being used for BC?  sure.  But once you start down the road of Government mandating that people and institutions must put their religious tenets & principals away, because someone wants something really bad, and is not willing to pay for it.....then the 1st amendment is basically defunct at that point

[sirs]

And here's a simple question......Why would anyone want to purchase goods or services from someone who doesn’t value them as a customer??