Friday, May 27, 2005

Judging Ally

I had an interesting comment on my last post, Equal Rights, suggesting that the pharmacist has no right to judge their customers. On one hand, I agree. I should be able to get whatever I need from a pharmacy without hiding my face. However, I also believe the pharmacist has a right to his/her own opinion, and if they are morally concerned about filling a prescription, then it is their prerogative to not fill it. It is also my choice as to where I buy my prescriptions. My point is that our own capitalism is what takes care of this situation. If a pharmacy won't fill one of my prescriptions, I won't shop there. So if they can find enough clientele to buy from them while maintaining their moral convictions, more power to them. There are just as many places out there without those restrictions to fill my prescription. In other words, it is not right to place a judgment on the pharmacist, either. I don't get the impression the pharmacist is judging me because they won't fill my birth control prescription. That does not mean the pharmacist thinks I'm a terrible person - they just disagree with my use of birth control. I disagree with their belief against birth control. That is not a judgment - that is a different of beliefs. If the pharmacist proceeds to give me their moral judgment of my behavior....then we have a problem. Some family restaurants will not serve alcohol because it is against their religious leanings; isn't that their choice? I am concerned with assuming what other people think of us, because the more we try to force what we want or what we think should happen, the more limits we place on others. We assume what others mean when they say things or do things, yet we do not like when that is done to us. My commenter makes a good point - there are sensitive prescriptions, like those for HIV or AIDS, STDs, that are already embarrassing to have filled. How much more embarrassing it might be to have them turned down by the pharmacist? But how embarrassing is it for the pharmacist to have to face the public with their convictions, and deal with the social outcry? Embarrassment goes both ways, and in my mind, is not enough to legislate against someone else's freedoms. Life is full of embarrassment and humiliation. Most of it, you just have to accept as part of life. The more we come down on each other's freedoms of choice and thought, the more we limit our own.