Pharmacist Refused to Fill Woman's Miscarriage Prescription (1 Viewer)

Well, facts in the Bible are few and far between.

I mean, when I have actually asked people how they square that there are: people turned into salt, a tower almost built to heaven, a boat with two of every animal, the world being repopulated by 8 people in less than 10 generations, a guy eaten by a whale and living, giants, talking snakes and of course reanimating of dead people. Their response is almost alsways something about parable or metaphor. Which means they take certain parts as parable and metaphor while holding other parts as truth. So who decides which is which?

It’s either whole cloth the word of god or it isn’t. You can’t have it both ways but that is exactly what we do. And permit for some reason.
 
Well, facts in the Bible are few and far between.

I mean, when I have actually asked people how they square that there are: people turned into salt, a tower almost built to heaven, a boat with two of every animal, the world being repopulated by 8 people in less than 10 generations, a guy eaten by a whale and living, giants, talking snakes and of course reanimating of dead people. Their response is almost alsways something about parable or metaphor. Which means they take certain parts as parable and metaphor while holding other parts as truth. So who decides which is which?

It’s either whole cloth the word of god or it isn’t. You can’t have it both ways but that is exactly what we do. And permit for some reason.
But a whole lot of people and leaders should maybe look at reflecting on this

“Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. ...
 
Sure and I tossed off the quip
But typically I mean, can you defend your position legally- like does your rhetoric match the text you proport to adhere to
If your position can’t be supported by the gospels- or more importantly, can be contradicted by the gospels - poof, no justification

Like I said, in the Bible, you can find passages and make arguments based on both literal text and interpretation, for and against the same subject, like contraception: on one hand, God knew you since before you were conceived, therefore your soul was planted as soon as that egg was fertilized, and so against any abortion; on the other hand, there is the punishment for pregnancies out of wedlock, which is not only abortion, but sterilizing the woman (not the man, of course).

It gets entertaining when it involves the OT; and even more entertaining when you show the contradictions.
 
Actually, most often than not, that'll get you nowhere. One of the "great" things about the Bible and its many translations, is that one can interpret/rationalize any given passage to mean anything one wants
And this is precisely why it should never be allowed in policy making or public schools.
 
Like I said, in the Bible, you can find passages and make arguments based on both literal text and interpretation, for and against the same subject, like contraception: on one hand, God knew you since before you were conceived, therefore your soul was planted as soon as that egg was fertilized, and so against any abortion; on the other hand, there is the punishment for pregnancies out of wedlock, which is not only abortion, but sterilizing the woman (not the man, of course).

It gets entertaining when it involves the OT; and even more entertaining when you show the contradictions.
Just reading up on qualifications to be granted ‘conscientious objector’ status - that should be the lowest bar someone claiming religious exemption needs to clear
 
And this is precisely why it should never be allowed in policy making or public schools.
And that is why this exists in Article VI section 3 of the Constitution of the United States:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
 
Just reading up on qualifications to be granted ‘conscientious objector’ status - that should be the lowest bar someone claiming religious exemption needs to clear
The Bible is historical allegory, not historical fact. If the adherents of the Bible were truly interested in the historical Jesus, he would be seen as a married man (because Jewish men GOT married) likely to Mary Magdalene, and he would be of dark complexion with dark hair and Mediterranean/Middle Eastern features because, you know, Galilee is not in Kansas anymore.
 
Last edited:
anytime someone tries to use the bible argument about anything with me about what someone else shouldn't be doing, i just simply ask if they follow every rule of the Bible, and if they do not (obviously they do not), why is it ok for you and not the person you are judging? it usually makes them start studdering and bumbling.. then they just get mad..
then i start giving examples and then it really ticks them off .
 
The Bible is historical allegory, not historical fact. If the adherents of the Bible were truly interested in the historical Jesus, he would be seen as a married man (because Jewish men GOT married) likely to Mary Magdalene, and he would be of dark complexion with dark hair and Mediterranean features because, you know, Galilee is not in Kansas anymore.
Remember the outrage when this picture was released?

C9CE3B17-F4CF-4ED6-825B-98F362991F57.jpeg
 
Remember the outrage when this picture was released?

C9CE3B17-F4CF-4ED6-825B-98F362991F57.jpeg
The movie Ben-Hur has a scene where Judah Ben-Hur falls in exhaustion. A man offers him water. I think the man offering the water is supposed to be Jesus, and he is depicted as Middle Eastern in appearance.
 
This is local to me. Used to work in Falls Church
================================
FALLS CHURCH, Va. (AP) - A nurse practitioner from northern Virginia has sued CVS Health after she says she was fired for refusing to provide abortion-inducing drugs at its MinuteClinic medical facilities.

Paige Casey said CVS had for years granted her a religious accommodation that allowed her to opt out of prescribing or providing abortion-inducing drugs and certain contraceptives without incident.

But in a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Manassas, she says the company changed its policy last year.............

 
CVS is being hit with yet another lawsuit from a former employee who said they were fired for refusing to prescribe birth control and Plan B because of religious beliefs.

In a suit filed Wednesday, former CVS Health nurse practitioner Robyn Strader claims the drugstore chain violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by revoking her religious accommodation while "refusing to consider her particular circumstances or even discuss possible alternative accommodations" and subsequently terminating her for failure to dispense contraceptives.

The suit claims CVS previously granted Strader religious accommodation so that she was not required to give out birth control at the MinuteClinic where she worked in Keller, Texas. But in August 2021, the company revoked the policy.

Strader, who said she is a Christian and a longtime member of the Baptist Church, referred patients seeking birth control and abortion-inducing drugs to other nearby clinics, a practice the lawsuit claims "worked successfully for years" before her religious accommodation was revoked.

The lawsuit argues that CVS is attempting to "sidestep Title VII's requirement to accommodate religious employees by merely labeling a particular function 'essential,'" after the company deemed providing birth control an essential part of the jobs of providers and nurses.

"After accommodating Robyn for six and a half years without a single complaint, CVS fired her because it simply did not like her pro-life religious beliefs," Christine Pratt, counsel for First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit Christian conservative legal organization representing Strader, said in a statement.

CVS Executive Director of Corporate Communications Mike DeAngelis told Insider in a statement that sexual health education and treatment "have become essential job functions" for providers and nurses, adding the company "cannot grant exemptions from these essential MinuteClinic functions unless it is required by state law."

"We have a well-defined process in place for employees to request and be granted a reasonable accommodation due to their religious beliefs, which in some cases can be an exemption from performing certain job functions," he said. "It is not possible, however, to grant an accommodation that exempts an employee from performing the essential functions of their job."

Currently, six states — Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota — allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense birth control pills or Plan B for religious reasons...................

 
CVS is being hit with yet another lawsuit from a former employee who said they were fired for refusing to prescribe birth control and Plan B because of religious beliefs.

In a suit filed Wednesday, former CVS Health nurse practitioner Robyn Strader claims the drugstore chain violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by revoking her religious accommodation while "refusing to consider her particular circumstances or even discuss possible alternative accommodations" and subsequently terminating her for failure to dispense contraceptives.

The suit claims CVS previously granted Strader religious accommodation so that she was not required to give out birth control at the MinuteClinic where she worked in Keller, Texas. But in August 2021, the company revoked the policy.

Strader, who said she is a Christian and a longtime member of the Baptist Church, referred patients seeking birth control and abortion-inducing drugs to other nearby clinics, a practice the lawsuit claims "worked successfully for years" before her religious accommodation was revoked.

The lawsuit argues that CVS is attempting to "sidestep Title VII's requirement to accommodate religious employees by merely labeling a particular function 'essential,'" after the company deemed providing birth control an essential part of the jobs of providers and nurses.

"After accommodating Robyn for six and a half years without a single complaint, CVS fired her because it simply did not like her pro-life religious beliefs," Christine Pratt, counsel for First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit Christian conservative legal organization representing Strader, said in a statement.

CVS Executive Director of Corporate Communications Mike DeAngelis told Insider in a statement that sexual health education and treatment "have become essential job functions" for providers and nurses, adding the company "cannot grant exemptions from these essential MinuteClinic functions unless it is required by state law."

"We have a well-defined process in place for employees to request and be granted a reasonable accommodation due to their religious beliefs, which in some cases can be an exemption from performing certain job functions," he said. "It is not possible, however, to grant an accommodation that exempts an employee from performing the essential functions of their job."

Currently, six states — Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota — allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense birth control pills or Plan B for religious reasons...................

Here's what I don't understand....if someone doesn't want to do this because of their religion, why not say "ok, fine, move over and let Dr Cindy do it." That person doesn't have to be fired, just moved out of the way temporarily while someone else does it. I know there is a bigger issue here, but why make it even bigger?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom