Replies

I have not read all the responses, but most of them seem to ignore the real issue here--the morning after pill is not simply a contraceptive but could function as an abortifaciant. (Standard hormonal contraceptives also function part of the time as abortifaciants as well, but my understanding is that the "morning-after pill" [what a euphemism] necessarily will do so more frequently.) So the governor is bypassing the representatives of the people to force pharmacists to become potential material cooperators in abortion. That's moving abortion from a supposed "choice" for those who wish to do it to a civic duty for those in certain professions. That is a violation of conscience, in the same way that laws forcing hospitals to provide abortions or medical schools to train abortionists or (down the road, not to many miles ahead) forcing doctors to do abortions?? What has become of freedom of religion, freedom of conscience? Does citizen A's desire for an abortifaciant trump citizen B's choice to have nothing to do with what he is persuaded is immoral? Since when does the government have the power to force people to do what they believe to be morally evil?

Blago's tyranny is only the latest in a series of moves to try to force those who oppose abortion or contraception or both to become complicit in acts they belief to be wrong.

It's fine to say, "do civil disobedience and take your punishment" but surely, before a law is passed that puts people with conscientious scruples in a position of paying a professional price for their beliefs it ought to have an airing in the legislature?

Would those who see this as "no big deal" say the same if the government started ordering hospitals and medical staffs actively to participate in euthanizing babies or the disabled under the guise of carrying out a "medical procedure" rather than "filling a prescription"?

The first step is to stop calling this "contraception" and call a spade a spade: the "contraceptive abortion pill."