Not covered, IMO. A pharmacist isn’t writing the scrip and isn’t administering the treatment. They’re merely completing a retail transaction, albeit one with a lot of paperwork. If they have a moral position against doing their job as prescribed by law, they should find a new job.
A care provider, like a doctor or nurse, has personal involvement with the patient. I’m ok with refusing to perform a procedure they disagree with, as long as there is no negative impact for the patient.
Pharmacists are a strictly regulated profession. The whole job is filling prescriptions ordered by doctors and informing customers (patients) about the safe use of the substances. It’s not a creative process and it’s not their choice to prescribe or deny medication.
Last I checked bakers and photographers are barely regulated by comparison, and you could easily consider their work creative in nature.
On one side I would say what the others are replying to you said, but on the other side I could see myself not wanting to dispense the drugs for an execution. (I know they’re not going through the pharmacy, but let’s pretend they did.)
I would be inclined to say it’s not “performative” and say they have to though.
Hypotheticals are quite a useful thing when exploring ideas. And yes, I’m quite satisfied with how I approached it since I tried to contribute in a positive way rather than just go around and write shit comments that don’t benefit anyone.
Sure, but your example is too extreme to take seriously.
Death like that is so much worse than anything else, that it imo makes any other discussion meaningless. But when your scenario would never ever happen, it’s just a useless comment.
Maybe, but the problem here is that it’s so extreme that it makes no sense.
Bringing up abortion pills would makeore sense, since someone could conceivably consider that to be murder and refuse to sell it. That would obviously be very stupid but it’s something that actually could happen.
What about a pharmacist refusing to fill a legal, correct, and safe prescription that they disagree with?
Not covered, IMO. A pharmacist isn’t writing the scrip and isn’t administering the treatment. They’re merely completing a retail transaction, albeit one with a lot of paperwork. If they have a moral position against doing their job as prescribed by law, they should find a new job.
A care provider, like a doctor or nurse, has personal involvement with the patient. I’m ok with refusing to perform a procedure they disagree with, as long as there is no negative impact for the patient.
Pharmacists are a strictly regulated profession. The whole job is filling prescriptions ordered by doctors and informing customers (patients) about the safe use of the substances. It’s not a creative process and it’s not their choice to prescribe or deny medication.
Last I checked bakers and photographers are barely regulated by comparison, and you could easily consider their work creative in nature.
Humn… that’s a tough one tbh.
On one side I would say what the others are replying to you said, but on the other side I could see myself not wanting to dispense the drugs for an execution. (I know they’re not going through the pharmacy, but let’s pretend they did.)
I would be inclined to say it’s not “performative” and say they have to though.
Tough one.
Is your entire argument based on something that doesn’t happen and will never happen?
Hypotheticals are quite a useful thing when exploring ideas. And yes, I’m quite satisfied with how I approached it since I tried to contribute in a positive way rather than just go around and write shit comments that don’t benefit anyone.
Sure, but your example is too extreme to take seriously.
Death like that is so much worse than anything else, that it imo makes any other discussion meaningless. But when your scenario would never ever happen, it’s just a useless comment.
It doesn’t strengthen any point.
Using extreme is actually a common way to test scenarios…
Maybe, but the problem here is that it’s so extreme that it makes no sense.
Bringing up abortion pills would makeore sense, since someone could conceivably consider that to be murder and refuse to sell it. That would obviously be very stupid but it’s something that actually could happen.
Yea, that’s a good example indeed. I did think of it because for me there is no moral contention there.