ACLJ to Defend Two Pharmacists Fired for Refusing to Provide Abortifacients (Where's the ACLU???)

LifeSiteNews ^ | 23 December 2005

[Aussie Dasher]

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) announced today that legal action is underway in defense of two pharmacists who were fired for refusing to hand out abortifacient drugs.

“These Conscience Clause cases are significant and represent the cutting edge of the abortion debate in our country right now;” ACLJ said in a statement to the press. “Doctors, nurses and pharmacists should not be compelled to violate their conscience and participate in an abortion procedure. We have already had success in a number of cases around the country, and we are confident that we will succeed in Illinois as well.”

[Aussie Dasher]

Where are those champions of civil rights, the ACLU, in this case? (sarc off)

[Joe Boucher]

Enormous respect for these guys that refuse to kill babies and take a stand.

[Aussie Dasher]

They are modern-day heroes and will be recognised as such in generations to come.

[VOA]

Where's the ACLU???

Hey, they are "the cavalary" that usually only rides to the rescue of
Communists, pedophiles and Jerry Springer freak show types.

[F16Fighter]

Doctors, nurses and pharmacists should not be compelled to violate their conscience and participate in an abortion procedure.

Absolutely NOT.

Their job also doesn't compel them to drop the guillotine OR pull the switch on the electric chair -- which is even a lesser equivalent.

[ndt]

First, I am not prolife and I only mention this because I agree that the pharmacists have the right to sell or not sell whatever they want (assuming it is legal) based on whatever reasoning they choose.

[evad]

..defense of two pharmacists who were fired for refusing to hand out abortifacient drugs.

What crime are the pharmacists charged with?

I thought they had simply been terminated for not performing their jobs, not for committing a crime.

[ndt]

"I thought they had simply been terminated for not performing their jobs, not for committing a crime."

Ahhh.. you're right, I missed the "fired" part. Note to self read the dang article before posting.

Let me restate my previous post with the new facts in mind.

I agree that the pharmacists pharmacies have the right to sell or not sell whatever they want (assuming it is legal) based on whatever reasoning they choose. They also have the right to fire the pharmacists if he refuses to do his/her job. The pharmacists have the right to look for another pharmacy to work at that shares common points of view.

[evad]

ditto!!!!!!!!

[YOUGOTIT]

The ACLU is supporting terrorist, and trying to kill Christmas - that is where they are.

[muawiyah]

Hmmm ~ how about adding "within the bounds of morality, and with violation of freedom of conscience, speech or association".

I know you don't believe in freedom of conscience, but just about everybody else does.

[ndt]

"I know you don't believe in freedom of conscience, but just about everybody else does."

They are fee to express their conscience by associating with a Pharmacy that does not provide abortifacient drugs.

As a pharmacist they damn well know what they sell at a pharmacy. If they had a problem with it they need to make that known when they are interviewing. If they refuse to do their job, yes fire them.

Here are some other Words of Wisdom© for those looking for a job.

Vegans, especially those affiliated with Peta should not apply for a job flipping burgers at McDonald's.

White supremacist should not apply for a job to sell bread at at the Black Muslim Bakery.

Homosexuals should not try to become Catholic priests.

Those uncomfortable with having their breasts on display should not work at a place called Hooters.

There is nothing preventing these people from successfully executing the demands of their jobs (I'm sure there is a Catholic soon to reply), but if they refuse to do what their bosses tell them to do they may be summarily dismissed.

[muawiyah]

The rules were changed after they were hired. On the other hand, the rules really weren't changed since Illinois law still prohibits what happened. The Governor of Illinois issued an executive order that requires pharmacies to violate the law.

I am sure this will all be worked out in court.

The lesson is that people in Illinois don't know how to vote or this Governor would have been left to his own devices running the slots or something.

[ndt]

"The rules were changed after they were hired. "

I'm not sure what you are referring to, the guy in Texas said:

"In my mind if I agree to work for someone knowing that that's their policy, then I should submit to that policy. But I didn't even know about it,"

That is just a plea of ignorance.

"The Governor of Illinois issued an executive order that requires pharmacies to violate the law."

I don't see that mentioned in the article and I'm not up on Illinois politics so I will refrain on commenting. If you have information that you think would change my mind and you have the desire to do so feel free to post and I'll give it a fair hearing.

[evad]

Illinois law still prohibits what happened.

What law would that be?

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Only one thing is certain - abortion and the use of abortificient contraceptives is plain murder.

[ndt]

"Only one thing is certain - abortion and the use of abortificient contraceptives is plain murder."

Not as defined by the laws of the nation.

[Libertina]

Does anyone take the oath to do no harm anymore? Even physicians?

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Unborn children are getting murdered irrespective of how the law defines it.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

Good question, I wonder if there is a form of Hippocratic Oath for pharmacists?