Mathom Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Although there will be the odd exception, the chances are that someone who requires the morning after pill has a slapdash method of contrception and a poor regard for he own self worth. If this is the case then going another 4 miles might seem a big deal to her. There will be a minority who has had an "accident" with their husband and then may have medical reasons for not leaving it to God to sort out, those people won't care about travelling 4, 40 or even 400 miles to get it sorted as it will be such an unusual and serious event. Two words: split condom. Might happen to your missus one day! For a woman to have the common sense to think there may have been a mistake or accident and to get herself together and down to the chemist for a MAP suggests she's got anything BUT a 'poor regard for her own self worth'! The ones with poor self worth are the ones who end up a few weeks later going "Oh Cr@p! I'm pregnant! I knew I should've played safe and got that pill!" Come on, this is 2006 not 1906, women are entitled to this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesandtwos Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 along similar lines, I once witnessed a muslim cashier on the tills at sainsburies refuse to sell alcohol to the customer in front of me. was done very politely though and she got the supervisor to serve the customer for her. suppose a pharmacist is a little different as gnerally just one on the premises in most cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Nobody was asking the pharmacist, nor any of his family, to take the pill. He was imposing his religious beliefs on someone else. Which is wrong! How, then, is it right for us to force our religious beliefs on him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Come on, this is 2006 not 1906, women are entitled to this! Well said. The scant disregard for this womans "right" to contraception is scandalous. If she is brave enough to put her hands up and say "i made a mistake last night, please can i have the morning after pill", then she should not be dismissed on someone elses religous grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Well said. The scant disregard for this womans "right" to contraception is scandalous. In case you've forgotten, any and all shops in this country - pharmacies included - reserve the right to refuse to serve anyone they choose. If he'd refused to dispense a prescription for something, he'd have his licence removed, but that is NOT what happened here. Someone went into his shop and tried to buy something, and he did not wish to sell it. He is not obliged to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHOIRBOY Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 There is no place for religion or "conscience" when it comes to operating a vital arm of the National Health Service, where the individual or a Company makes a living from the taxpayer. The get-out clause in the Contract is ridiculous and should be removed forthwith. As for the claim regarding "a nearby pharmacy" to the one in question, I think the nearest is 4 miles away......owned by the same Group, I could write chapter and verse about this Group, and the poor service I complained about to their Head Office, but I won't do so on this Forum. Surley if a shop dont sell or wont sell what you want you go somewhere else that is common sense. It was not a life or death situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Mariachi Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Of course, there are conscience clauses in relation to medical practice. We could hardly expect devout Catholics to be made to perform abortions, for example. However, I think this story might be viewed as part of a bigger picture. Hardly a day goes by (correction - a day never goes by) without an episode of a muslim refusing to do this or that, or making demands of one kind or another in the name of religion. Now it could be that these episodes are only new in the sense of the media attention they are now getting. Or it could be that they are manifestations of an increasing restive and truculent mood on the part of a particular community (or certain sections of it) which is increasingly emboldened by its growing numerical strength, by the multiculturalist doctrines which legitimise its demands, and also by the weakness and pusillanimity of our politicians and bureaucrats (who have a tendency to cave in to such demands in order to avoid being accused of 'Islamophobia' or 'racism', or simply to avoid aggro and to have a quiet life). Well which of the two do YOU think it is. 1) The media picking up everything to do with muslims OR 2) Emboldened muslims who are quick to play the Islamaphobia or racism card ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuressenceUK Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 So what's the betting on how many hours before this thread is closed? I'll give it 4 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CockneyMafia Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Well which of the two do YOU think it is. 1) The media picking up everything to do with muslims OR 2) Emboldened muslims who are quick to play the Islamaphobia or racism card ? As Abe Simpson once said "a little from column A and a little from Column B" Chances are this sort of thing has been happening for years, but was never really considered news worthy in the past... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordChaverly Posted October 14, 2006 Share Posted October 14, 2006 Well which of the two do YOU think it is. 1) The media picking up everything to do with muslims OR 2) Emboldened muslims who are quick to play the Islamaphobia or racism card ? I think it is a mixture of the two (but mainly the second - probably) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.