Now they don't want to have to dispense AIDS drugs

Mr. Brilliant and I have had some arguments about whether a pharmacist should be allowed to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives if doing so would violate his/her religious beliefs. Mr. Brilliant, always the logical one, set it forth as a religious freedom on the job issue -- not that he agrees with it, but when he plays the devil's advocate in these discussions, it keeps me sharp.

Reproductive self-determination is the issue that too many progressive men are willing to compromise on in the name of advancing our political candidates. But like so many issues that would seem to not be relevant to must of us (read: gay issues), this is one on which we simply cannot compromise.

Here's why:

A proposed regulation which would allow pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions based on the druggists moral views could be used to deny HIV/AIDS patients live saving medication a health advocate warns.

The Wyoming Board of Pharmacy is considering the rule change amid pressure by conservative groups opposed to the sale of contraceptives and birth control pills.

But, the regulation could be used to deny service in many other areas critics charge.

"It is so broad, that any pharmacist with any personal belief that is contrary to any particular drug is allowed to refuse to fill a legal prescription," Pamela Reamer Williams, director of the Casper-based Wyoming AIDS Project told the Star-Tribune.

"Health care professionals are supposed to help. They're not supposed to judge."

Currently, pharmacists are allowed to refuse to dispense a drug if they think a prescription may harm a patient or if the patient is being overmedicated. But Wyoming law is silent on moral conflicts.

Reamer Williams said that the rule change could allow druggists to turn away people they thought were gay.

"It's no secret to any of us that there are people in this state who have religious and moral objections to homosexuality, and it's not just homosexuals in this state or anywhere else that are living with AIDS," Reamer Williams told the paper.

"Some of these are people who never shot drugs, never had sex outside of marriage, did absolutely everything that was the moral way to behave, and they still ended up with HIV."

The board will consider the rule change when it meets next month.

To those who would argue that it's OK to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraceptives on the grounds that doing so would tacitly approve of non-procreative sex, does that extend to refusal to provide AIDS drugs on the grounds that your religion believes that AIDS sufferers deserved to be punished for sexual activity?

(hat tip: Pam)