In follow-up to Marty's comments, isn't comparison to the business stocking rule a red herring? As many have pointed out, pharmacies have many reasons not to carry every drug: supply and demand; availability; storage space, etc. Based on my personal experience and in having a child with a special need, pharmacies are always willing, if not eager for the $, to order a drug they don't carry. So by not carrying a drug they are not "refusing" to do so in the same manner as in Stormans. So is it accurate to say that pharmacies receive an exemption for business reasons that they wouldn't for religious reasons?
Steve -- Steven K. Green, J.D., Ph.D. Fred H. Paulus Professor of Law and Director Center for Religion, Law and Democracy Willamette University 900 State St., S.E. Salem, Oregon 97301 503-370-6732
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
