For Those in Kansas

It is great having a bunch of men telling women about their rights.stick to condoms guys.

Meh. Apparently we're just breeders. Who cares if birth control lowers the risk of ovarian cancer and other things besides preventing pregnancy? Poor little pharmacists are getting picked on and that's definitely not cool.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
SMH

Meh. Apparently we're just breeders. Who cares if birth control lowers the risk of ovarian cancer and other things besides preventing pregnancy? Poor little pharmacists are getting picked on and that's definitely not cool.
Thanks for the enlightenment.
SMH Originally Posted by Allie_Kat

Agreed, It is hard for me to understand that a man who is a boyfriend, husband,father or brother would want to restrict a woman's(girlfriend, wife, daughter, sister) access to legal contraceptives.

Can I get an Amen, for ekim's post!!!

It is great having a bunch of men telling women about their rights.stick to condoms guys. Originally Posted by ekim008

Then get some women elected to the legislature to enact laws that favor their preferences. They are not infringing on these women's rights, they are allowing the pharmacists to exercise their own rights.

Can I get a Bronx cheer to ekim's post.

Some small towns only have ONE pharmacy. You're going to suggest that they drive into a different town to obtain what they need? Originally Posted by Allie_Kat

The age of the internet kind of kills that argument don't you think? Hell just order it in bulk and have it to you in a few days. Shipping will most likely be cheaper than driving to the next town. It's funny how the left scream to the hilltops about the right to choose but deny someones right to not sell something as trivial as a pill. But I agree with everything else you said.

Now for you people on the right. My sister had health issues at 13 and became barren. It required her to take birth control pills. Since we live in KC I wouldn't care if a particular pharmacy denied her the sale. But you people really need to relax a bit. It's a fucking pill. I can understand your argument on the abortion pill and I respect that but Jesus Christ get a grip. This is nothing but pandering to flat world knuckle draggers.

The picture of the Kansas Gov almost made me laugh. He just looks like a giant douche bag. Originally Posted by KenMonk

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Well, this sucks. Now I'll never be able to see MsElena OR AlliKat.

Vote with your feet and wallet. It's just that simple.

Christ, you can't go 5 miles without hitting a Walmart.

To my Conservative brethren: would your opinions on this issue differ if the items for sale were not pills, but perhaps something more important to your values? Say for instance handguns?

What if liberals voted into being a law that said a gun shop owner had the right to refuse to sell you a gun? Now he might already be able to tell you to get out, its his store. But in my scenario he can legally tell you he won't sell you a gun, because he doesn't like your reasons for buying it.

There has been hypocrisy noted on the liberal side. Okay, I get that. Now its your turn.

Do we want to go down this path? Where I can sell this item, but if I don't like your reason for needing it I can legally tell you no? Why is your need for an item any of my damn business? If my girlfriend needs birth control who should be able to deny her that? The idiot behind the counter because of his fundamentalist views? I call BS. It's none of his business.

This legislation is simply another way for men to control women. Another way to keep them from being truly our equal, and their bodies used for our purposes and not their own. I oppose it on those grounds, it makes me ill to my stomach for those reasons, and I ask each of my conservative monger friends to look at themselves and ask how pissed off would you be if you went to Wal Mart Rx and they told your SO they weren't giving her the Rx her Dr said she could have because "you might do something with it I don't like".

Slippery slope folks. You point out sometimes fairly that gun control is a slippery slope. Just a means to ultimately grab guns is what I hear. Isn't this just another effort to keep women in the 1950's reproductively? To go back to those glorious days when sexual freedom meant getting pregnant?

I read a few articles on this law and it seems if a pharmacist refuses prescribing birth control they could be sued and would probably lose their license because the law only protects them from prescribing meds that may cause an abortion. From what I understand by talking to doctor and pharmacist friends birth control can't cause an abortion. The real scary thing is patients who need chemo drugs or other serious meds for serious medical conditions like cancer and other life threatening diseases because they could cause abortions. Also there are only a limited amount of pharmacies who deal in chemo because they have a short shelf life and need to be compounded on site. Which means sick people don't have the option to have them mail ordered and it might not be possible for them to drive sometimes hours to the next nearest pharmacy or hospital multiple times a week for their treatments.

I also think its funny people are defending this governors legislative choices based on freedom when at the same time he signed this bill he signed a bill banning insurance companies from offering insurance plans that offered coverage of abortions. Where is the freedom in that? If a company wants to sell coverage for abortions and I want to buy it who is being hurt except for crazy right wingers who don't like my choices?

What if liberals voted into being a law that said a gun shop owner had the right to refuse to sell you a gun? Now he might already be able to tell you to get out, its his store. But in my scenario he can legally tell you he won't sell you a gun, because he doesn't like your reasons for buying it. Originally Posted by Bartman1963

Actually, a law like this is already in existence. In places like New York, Illinois and California (liberal bastions all).

This legislation is simply another way for men to control women. Another way to keep them from being truly our equal, and their bodies used for our purposes and not their own. I oppose it on those grounds, it makes me ill to my stomach for those reasons, and I ask each of my conservative monger friends to look at themselves and ask how pissed off would you be if you went to Wal Mart Rx and they told your SO they weren't giving her the Rx her Dr said she could have because "you might do something with it I don't like". Originally Posted by Bartman1963

Then, I'll just tell her head to the Walgreens, CVS, Hen House, Price Chopper or HyVee within 6 blocks of my WalMart and get it there.

It is ok for you living in a large city,where there are choices.In smaller towns there is usually only one pharmacy,and if they refuse to sell it is a real inconvenience for the patrons

It is ok for you living in a large city,where there are choices.In smaller towns there is usually only one pharmacy,and if they refuse to sell it is a real inconvenience for the patrons Originally Posted by ekim008

So what? If they can't get the pharmacy to sell the prescriptions they want, use their pocketbooks and don't patronize the pharmacy. If enough pressure is applied, eventually, the pharmacy will go out of business or will begin selling the prescriptions. If not, too bad. That's the way the free market works.

Free market...only if legislators don't stick their noses in like they have with this. We have laws to protect people from monopolies and oligarchies. Most will say they are needed consumer protections from free market excesses.

Now we have a law to protect the rights of the pharmacy to deny service on a whim, not a professional whim, or one of safety for the patron, but to make him feel good about his profession and his relationship with God.

I notice you are living in this area not New York, Illinois or Cali. What if it happened here? Where you live. Suddenly the man behind the counter has control over your getting what you want. Pills, guns...the product is irrelevant. The whim of the man behind the counter to say no to you, only because he doesn't trust you will conform to his idea of how things should be. Not because you will do something illegal, but because he doesn't trust you will do what his religion says you should do. If you are in business to sell a class of product, in my mind you should not be able to say no unless you have reasonable cause to believe they are going to use it where it will pose a danger to others or themselves, or are too young to understand its use and the consequences.

Ever been to western Kansas? Some of those towns are 40 miles apart. Put yourself in that position. You have a house and an investment in property and now this happens. In this case the women in those small towns could literally have to travel 80 miles there and back because of someone else's mostly religious beliefs. Are you saying I should sell my house and move to Cali? Because my pharmacist has a problem with a drug I need. Talk about Sharia Law.

This type of law does not insure the liberty of the affected women. In fact it takes someone elses mores, religion and conscience and shoves them right up your wife's, SO or daughter's vagina.

And that damn well sucks.

Ever been to western Kansas? Some of those towns are 40 miles apart. Put yourself in that position. You have a house and an investment in property and now this happens. In this case the women in those small towns could literally have to travel 80 miles there and back because of someone else's mostly religious beliefs. Are you saying I should sell my house and move to Cali? Originally Posted by Bartman1963

Yep.