come on,
you cannot have individuals deciding
by means of their religious beliefs, or ethnicity, or biases,
who to serve or not serve.
if you were on the downside of this, you’d be outraged.
Being on the downside of this -- you mean one of the people being killed? Yes, I would be very outraged if people were forced out of their jobs for not helping to kill me.
The one on the downside,is the fetus.
Anyway, if the pharmacist doesn’t own the store, they have
to listen to the BOSS(as long as it’s legal).If they don’t
operate the hospital, they gotta listen to the director of
the pharmacy.
The pharmacist can alway ask for a waiver to not fill those
meds they feel are being immorally used. The state has
no right to force them to sell anything they know will harm
someone(read fetus) or possibly the mother.
This situation is seen every day with other drugs. As an example,
if a doctor orders a dose of medication or orders a medication
to be given in a way that will kill or harm the patient (example,
potassium chloride, or super high dose of digoxin) the pharmacist
and the nurse on duty have the duty to not administer the
medication. If they did without protestation to the physician
they would be liable themselves. So this ridiculous argument
that you gotta give what the doctor orders is nonsense.
If one knows for example, that a patient might be
allergic to the birth control pill, but fills the
prescription anyway, they are liable for any harm.
So since, the pharmacist knows the pill is harmful to
the developing fetus, they have a duty not to dispense it.
QED.