yes, that's true. We have had a little scope creep here haven't we? I guess the CVS pharmacist was wrong, but he was wrong because he didn't do his job not because he violated the wall between church and state. IMHO.
Dana On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:58:07 -0500, Howie Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If the owner of the pharmacy refuses to carry the pills then, yes, that is a > perogative (this is why you can't challenge Walmart for not varrying playboy > magazine even though they sell other magazines). However, in the context of > the original posting the pharmacist did not own the establishment and they > carried the item and he basically stole the scrip. > > Howie > > --- On Wednesday, November 10, 2004 1:52 PM, dana tierney scribed: --- > > > > OK, that makes sense. However, that's like saying that abortion is > > legal therefore all doctors must perform them. I think an individual > > pharmacist should be able to opt out. An employee of a chain pharmacy > > should follow the policy of the chain or seek employment elsewhere. > > > > Dana > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:135244 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
