Quote:
Originally posted by krazy
But this pill came out AFTER this guy was a pharmacist (I AM ASSUMING). If they all of a sudden started requiring pharmacists to kill every third person that walked up to the desk, would you feel he needed to do that? Now, I am playing devil's Advocate here, so please do not get angry. I am trying to point out, that this pharmacist obviously feels this is akin to what he would be doing by dispencing the pill. Why do you think your opinion is more important than his? Do you see my point?
|
No, his opinion and moral beliefs are valid, and no one asking him to give up his faith or compromise his beliefs. I also don't think anyone is thinking their opinion is more important than anyone elses. But this man violated corporate policy. And pleading ignorance is no excuse.
New drugs are being developed everyday, and I'm sure some people will find them objectionable. However, it is not up to the pharmacist to decided which drugs can and cannot be taken. A pharmacist is not a medical doctor. He is there to fill precriptions on behalf of the doctor, because the doctor feels that whatever medication is prescribed is the right course of treatment for the patient.
It doesn't matter that the pill came out ofter this man became a pharmacist because the company he worked for clearly had an established policy that he could not refuse to fill a prescription based on moral/ethical/religious reasons.
Threaded Mode