Christian pharmacists must stock abortifacients

Christian pharmacists must stock abortifacients July 1, 2016

A Christian-owned pharmacy chain refuses to stock “emergency contraception” drugs on the grounds that they cause abortion.  The state of Washington wants to compel the chain to carry the drugs, even though that would violate the owner’s religious beliefs.  The case would seem to be similar to that of Hobby Lobby, which won a ruling from the Supreme Court allowing it to opt out of Obamacare requirements.  But this time the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.  The pharmacies will have to sell the products.

In addition to the pro-life and religious liberty issues, I would think there would be business liberty issues.  Should the government really be able to mandate what products a retailer has to stock?

 

From Emma Green, The Storman’s Pharmacy Case Is Denied by the Supreme Court: Pharmacists Have to Sell Emergency Contraception Even in Violation of Their Religious Beliefs – The Atlantic:

Two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a controversial 5-4 ruling about birth control and religion, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Because of the ruling, private companies owned by religious people, including the craft-supply chain Hobby Lobby, can now refuse to cover certain kinds of birth control in their employee insurance plans, a requirement that was put in place by the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Supporters of the ruling claimed it as a triumph for religious freedom and an important precedent for cases about conscience-based objections to contraception.

Two years later, a pharmacy chain in Washington state, Stormans Inc., which operates a store in Olympia called Ralph’s Thriftway, has been denied a hearing before the Supreme Court. The pharmacy’s owners, along with two other pharmacists who are also plaintiffs in the case, Stormans, Inc. v. Wiesman, refused to stock emergency contraception, including Plan B and ella, for religious reasons—they believe the pills are effectively abortifacients. Long-standing state regulations require Washington pharmacies to stock a “representative assortment of drugs in order to meet the pharmaceutical needs of … patients.” The requirements were updated in 2007, specifying that pharmacies must deliver all FDA-approved drugs to customers; they can’t refer people to get medication at a different location for any kind of religious or moral reasons.
The owners of Stormans, along with two other pharmacists, challenged this update; they don’t want to carry or sell these products. Their complaints eventually made it to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied their claims. By refusing to hear the case, the U.S. Supreme Court has effectively done the same.

[Keep reading. . .] 

"I love that the day of worship moved from the last day of the first ..."

DISCUSSION: Easter
"Wait . . . Bugs Bunny isn't real?"

DISCUSSION: Easter
"Yes, my church will have a sunrise service at 6 AM (followed by services at ..."

DISCUSSION: Easter
"A "day" is a a 24-hour period in the same way that a piece of ..."

Sasse’s “This Is My Body”

Browse Our Archives