I'm sure you guys know what I think of this. Nevertheless, here's a good primer for those of us who haven't been reading beyond the headlines.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I'm not sure how you can compel an employee to participate in an activity that they feel is immoral. During the process of hiring an individual, the job requirements would be spelled out and if they refused to comply, then they would be fired or, more likely, not hired in the first place.
A janitor at Planned Parenthood who has a problem working in that environment would not have been hired in the first place. Likewise, a pharmacist hired into a pro-choice pharmacy.
I'm unclear as to the controversy here.
I'm not sure how you can compel an employee to participate in an activity that they feel is immoral.
What's really unclear as to how an employee can compel his employer to continue paying him when he's determined he can't do the job set before him because it's immoral.
But that's Christianity for you, I guess.
Tony, I think you are assuming that people will be honest. And I think this interpretation of the laws could make it illegal to even ask during the interview. Or applicants could lie, and say they had a conversion after they took the job. It'd be a way for anti-choice people (and now, even anti-birth-control people) to effectively shut down clinics they disapprove of. I guess for those people who think the Pill is, in fact, murder, it's an attractive tactic. Personally, I hope the Bush administration pushes this hard. It will force McCain to take a clear stand, pissing off one coalition or another, and Obama's odds will be much improved. The anti-abortion-rights crowd may be large, but a clear majority of people support access to basic birth control.
This isn't about access to contraception. It's about rights of conscience for those who dissent.
Wow, what a skewed presentation of the issue. I especially enjoyed the phrasing that said that employees of clinics, etc that receive federal money can prevent women from accessing contraception. That's complete BS, unless we are now charging clinic employees with surveillance and policing of all potential clients. That you can't get the pill/patch/ring/shot/IUD from places employing pro-life Christians doesn't mean there aren't plenty of other places willing to sell them to you. And obstinate pro-life employees disregarding company policy can be canned. Despite popular misconception, employers don't have to abide by the Bill of Rights.
Unless and until there is an actual ban on selling contraception to women, this is just a pro-abortion canard designed to rile up stupid people.
Tony:
There is no such thing as a pro-choice pharmacy, or an anti-choice pharmacy. There are anti-choice pharmacists who are perfectly happy to enjoy all the benefits of employment by a public company, such as CVS or Walgreen's, but want their private religious beliefs reflected in how that public company is run.
Another example: the founder of Domino's Pizza is an extremely conservative Catholic who is against abortion, but if a woman's clinic orders two large pepperonis, the local franchise will deliver the friggin pizza. Because it's a business, dammit, and Tom Monaghan recognizes this.
I would not expect to go into a Catholic hospital and get birth control, emergency or otherwise, because that is an arm of a non-profit institution that opposes same -- the same way Planned Parenthood is a non-profit institution that supports same.
My local Rite-Aid, on the other hand? I hand you a scrip, you hand it over. Period.
Re: The anti-abortion-rights crowd may be large, but a clear majority of people support access to basic birth control.
I would call it the 'anti-feticide' crowd, but otherwise you are correct.
Ta-Nehisi,
I'm a new reader who actually doesn't know where you stand on this issue, or any other, and I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one. I'm sure I'll learn, but for now, at least, posts like this are going to mystify me.
Sorry Elizabeth,
I'm pro-choice, and moreso, pro-contraception. I understand the basic argument that people shouldn't have to do things that they morally object to, especially regarding abortion. I'm less willing to extend that sort of thinking to birth control pills. I don't like the idea of women in whole swaths of our country not having access to the pill. If you don't want to work somewhere where you have to dispense birth control pills, don't work there. I don't like the idea of serving fried chicken--so I don't work at KFC. Seems simple enough.
I can appreciate tgb1000's sentiment of anti-choice pharmacists taking a job under false pretenses and then refusing to adhere to company policies. That's a legal issue and I'm sure a slew of labor lawyers could chime in.
The fact remains that there are some pharmacists who have a moral problem with handing over birth control pills and esp morning after pills-- I don't get it but I respect their moral feelings. Just as there are people who may not want to sell cigarettes or alcohol, etc. They are free to work at another pharmacy or convenience store, etc.
Does every gynecologist need to perform abortion on demand because a patient may ask for it? Amswer: no.