Rape victim: 'Morning after' pill denied

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Maybe so but thats an assumption that would need market research to verify on a pharmacy store to pharmacy store basis.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The morning-after pill? Remember the whole point being that it is time-critical?

Remember that the "morning after pill" is licenced for use up to 72 hours after intercourse. Express mail would definetly get it in time, as would going to another pharmacy the next day.

You didn't actually think you needed to take it the morning after for it to work, did you?

[Guynemer]

The chance of effectiveness goes down during that 72 hour time frame, Imran. It prevents the fertilized ovum from implanting in the uterus, which usually happens around 72 hours after fertilization, but could happen sooner.

[Patroklos]

If it turns out there are areas that only have Catholic hospitals which are unwilling to perform abortions, yes. However, I highly doubt there is an issue here.

Ah, but now you are adding qualifiers, which does not do anything to address the point. If a Catholic hospital does not want to provide an abortion, it doesn't have to.

Is this supposed to be some sort of argument? Abortions also aren't necessarily time-critical in the way the morning-after pill is, and so you can always go to a more distant one. Hell, I commuted 20 miles to work every day over the summer...

I Catholic hospital doesn't have to give you a morning after pill either, and won't, no matter how time critical it is.

Incidently, it is funny how you all think that those defending a persons right to practice personel morality are automaticaly anti morning after pill.

I guess you all also disagree with conciencious objectors when it comes to the draft as well? How dare those peaceniks push their morality on me

[Dinner]

So now expecting people to actually do the job they claim they are doing is pushing morality on people? These people aren't forced to be pharmacists but if they want to be one then they need to do the whole job.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Ah, but now you are adding qualifiers, which does not do anything to address the point. If a Catholic hospital does not want to provide an abortion, it doesn't have to.

Obviously. I'm talking about what ought to be.

I Catholic hospital doesn't have to give you a morning after pill either, and won't, no matter how time critical it is.

Obviously. I'm talking about what ought to be.

Incidently, it is funny how you all think that those defending a persons right to practice personel morality are automaticaly anti morning after pill.

Practice your personal morality by not operating a pharmacy then.

I guess you all also disagree with conciencious objectors when it comes to the draft as well? How dare those peaceniks push their morality on me

We've got enough people to accommodate them and let them be medics and such, and they perform extremely useful roles anyway.

[Patroklos]

We've got enough people to accommodate them and let them be medics and such, and they perform extremely useful roles anyway.

We have enough pharmacies and pharmacist to afford them the same luxury.

Do you realize you just completely caved with that statement?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Patroklos
We have enough pharmacies and pharmacist to afford them the same luxury.

Do you realize you just completely caved with that statement?

Except the entire point is, we don't. In some areas there AREN'T pharmacies that stock the morning-after pill.

[Patroklos]

Where in the United States can you not drive for 12 hours (more like 3) and not reach a major population center?

I did it.

I think you just get a hard on by making people sell their souls. Why don't you visit the current ID thread if you want to see how people feel when you try to force them to do something they feel repugnant.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Once again, and in another thread I am not amazed by what i read. For one has it occured to anyone, that you have a room ful of men arguing a womans choices and decesions again? Sure given in this case it is a male pharamcist but what makes you folks think you have an argument. A pharamcy is in the business to fill perscriptions thats it nothing more nothing less, do they have the obligation to teach of the drug be dispensed yes, but does the consumer have to listen to get their durgs, no. Using the argument some of you have said goes along the same lines as one that had a dependacny to pain killers, If its the pharamcist who became addictied who cant and wont dispense this drug for his personal reason, he needs not have this job. When is it going to occur to you men folk that some woman are tired of you barbarians and your hairdragging around of your women to understand we dont need your permisson or acceptance to do with our selves as we choose fit.
Ben Kenobi Come off that dam catholic soap box and read what the hell the topic is. You have once again managed to drag up crap that is in no response to the topic at hand. And just for the record the topic here isnt abortion.

[Patroklos]

Mrs. T, are you drunk?

The moral/constitutional arguement does not change if everyone invovled in the situation was a woman(this long ago morfed away from simply the OP situation).

Not to mention the myraid other reasons your attempt the femflame this topic is BS.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

pat why must one be drunk to be able to read what yall have been discussing. I simply stated the mronig after pill has nothing to do with abortion since no pregnancy exists. I was speaking to bk on that. As far as the rest i have read a room full of men deciding if its right or wrong for this pill to be dispensed or not. The pharmacists has no right one way or the other to deny a person their perscription of they have the means to fill it. This is like sayin i will not fill ur perscription for vicidon because ur addicted and i know it. So your atttempts to accuse femflame **** is way out there.

[Patroklos]

i have read a room full of men

So, whats your point other than your a biggot?

pharmacists has no right one way or the other to deny a person their perscription of they have the means to fill it.

Accodring to the constitution and the law, you are wrong.

So your atttempts to accuse femflame **** is way out there.

Whatever, you tried to pull the whole its a female issue when it is obvioulsy improtant to everyone.

Again, since it fits here as well, are you not allowed to have an opinion on the draft since it is a male issue? Well I guess you can, but your logic makes your opinion not matter.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Patroklos
I think you just get a hard on by making people sell their souls. Why don't you visit the current ID thread if you want to see how people feel when you try to force them to do something they feel repugnant.

No one is trying to force anyone to do anything. What they have said is if the person chooses to be a pharmacist then they must perform all the aspects of the job. If they find they are unable to do the job, for what ever reason, then they should find a different line of work. How is that forcing people?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

i fail to see how my stating a mere fact as being a biggot. For in fact this is a room for this thread full of men pure fact. Not fiction. I amnot sure what constintution you are refering to, but last i checked, a person that has a bonified perscription the pharmacy has every means necessary to check the validity of the script but not discount the original script. The whole female issue is only about wether or not you or any othe male inthis thread or profession has the right to deny this woman her valid perscription. I wasnt the one who mentioned this was due to relegiois resons or what have you. So there for you have not dented any argument but instead stooped to an all and out name calling duel.