General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Rude Pundit - Fuck Your Conscience; Do Your Job
Let us say, and why not, that you are a firefighter, the captain of the department in Sisterfuck, Arkansas, a little bit outside Little Rock, and, in your off-duty life, you're a good, loyal member of the Church of the Bloodiest Christ You've Ever Seen. At your church, Pastor Jamie Lee Closetqueer preaches about how abortion is just President Obama trying to murder Christians to make room for more Muslims. You never saw a Muslim abortion clinic, did you?
Now let us say, and, indeed, why not, that one night the Planned Parenthood in Little Rock goes up in flames and it's all hands on deck, all around the county, the area, even. Your squad is called into action before the whole complex, maybe the block, burns down. But you know that the Planned Parenthood does abortions. You're faced with a choice. Pastor Closetqueer's words echo in your ear: "If you support the sin, you are a sinner yourself." Do you tell your Sisterfuck squad to stand down, let it burn, let other firefighters handle it? Or do you go against your faith and do your goddamn job?
It's not a big leap from pharmacists to firefighters. Down the road a bit from Sisterfuck is Millegdeville, Georgia, where Brittany Cartrett had a miscarriage. She needed assistance passing the miscarried fetus, so her doctor prescribed her Misoprostol, a pill that would help her complete what had started naturally, if sadly. When her doctor called local Walmart to have it filled, the pharmacist on duty refused to do so because, as she later told Cartrett, "I couldn't think of a valid reason why you would need this prescription." Misoprostol can be used to induce abortion, which is why it would be effective after a miscarriage. When Cartrett explained why she needed it, the pharmacist said, "Well, I don't feel like there is a reason why you would need it, so we refused to fill it."
And it's perfectly fine because Georgia has a law that says if pharmacists think that someone's prescription violates their beliefs, they can refuse to fill it because of a conscience clause, which over 20 states have or are considering. In this case, that meant that, despite a doctor calling in the prescription, the pharmacist thought, "Abortin' babeez" and bugged out.
By the way, Brittany Cartrett is a devout Christian who once worked at the same Walmart. And her response to the ensuing controversy, which became known because of her Facebook post on it, is about as common sense as you can get: "The point is that she refused to fill it based on an assumption and that is not her job. Her job is to fill it. Not to make the decision as to why I needed it. There has to be a line drawn when it comes to stuff like this."
Cartrett also wrote, awesomely, "I don't care about an apology. I care about women going through one of the worst possible things that they could go through and to be judged and refused. And what if I was going to get it for an abortion? I don't personally believe in abortion, but I would never judge or disrespect someone who felt like that was the only choice they had. As a friend, I would try to advise alternative options. As a pharmacist? It's not my place."
When you're right, you're right. Conscience clauses when it comes to things like this are just impositions of one's religion on others. Do your fucking job. If you can't do your fucking job properly, find another fucking job. If your bullshit beliefs are going to prevent you from fulfilling basic duties, then get the fuck out of the public sector. Go work for a church. Just stay away from people who might need you to shut the fuck up and do the job. Conservatives like to talk about "special rights" for different groups. An exclusion from the duties of your profession is pretty much the picture book definition of "special rights."
It ain't just religion. In Carlisle, Pennsylvania, a school nurse refused to assist a middle school student and threw the girl out of her office. The girl's crime? She didn't stand during the Pledge of Allegiance, the loyalty oath students around the country are asked to recite every morning at their indoctrination center schools. Except, interestingly enough, the Pledge is voluntary, and the nurse is being investigated for abiding by her patriotic conscience. So there is a line.
When it comes to religion, though, that line is being erased. We are not far from just letting shit burn.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2015/04/fuck-your-conscience-do-your-job.html
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)calimary
(81,238 posts)In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Novara
(5,841 posts)....a rich, white, male, patriarchal, fundamentalist Christian-only theocracy. You know, like the Taliban.
erronis
(15,241 posts)alterfurz
(2,474 posts)NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)guarantees much more of this insane bullshit...
Initech
(100,068 posts)The America that the evangelical Taliban picture would pretty much be the worst thing ever .
Unexploded Scotsman
(50 posts)No doubt about it: Theocracy BAD! And that's as it should be.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Is the pharmacist also an MD? I'm not aware of any requirement for them to be such, and I would have thought it would be rare, since they could presumably make more money as an MD than as a pharmacist.
Seems to me like the pharmacist who decides 'Well, I don't feel like there is a reason why you would need it, so we refused to fill it.' needs to be brought up before his licensing board on charges that he is working beyond the scope of his practice and lose his license for pretending to be a doctor.
LittleGirl
(8,287 posts)Ilsa
(61,695 posts)Medicine without a license, IMO. It wasn't her job to give a second opinion to the doctor's orders and treatment plan.
I hope some lawsuits along this line will develop. These sanctimonious asses need to have their livelihoods threatened.
Pacifist Patriot
(24,653 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)What if for some reason, she had hemorrhaged? What if there was some kind of infection from the dead fetus she had to carry around because this person decided she did not "need" her prescription? You are exactly right, this pharmacist is not only practicing medicine, but withholding medical treatment. I hope she sues the crap outta WalMart.
niyad
(113,284 posts)has that damned "conscience clause", so she is "protected" for being a woman-hating fundie jerk.
Kber
(5,043 posts)according to the law.
Because I don't think you medically need this - wrong and not legally supported.
Because I don't believe you should take this, according to my religious beliefs - still wrong, but legally a-ok.
mwooldri
(10,303 posts)The doctor ordered the medication for the benefit of the patient. That doctor could have gone to the pharmacist directly and presented the prescription. However it's not a very efficient way to deliver medicine, unless the pharmacy is within the doctors office - very rare (unless it's a "hospital" . So the patient goes to the pharmacy and essentially asks to collect and pay for what the doctor ordered (or other medication prescribing health care practitioner).
In this case, the pharmacist refused to comply with the doctor's order, putting the patient into a "piggy in the middle" situation.
However I usually find that unless you're getting run-of-the-mill medication, I get better satisfaction dealing with an independent pharmacist. I had one heck of a run around with CVS and trying to get a prescription filled. In the end, the pharmacist recommended we go to Gate City Pharmacy here in Greensboro, NC, and they are in my eyes the best pharmacy ever. If it wasn't for the fact that our group health care insurance gives us a heavy incentive to use CVS, I would do all of our prescriptions with Gate City.
I agree with you in that we both think the pharmacist "crossed the line".
ProfessorGAC
(65,010 posts)I usually like Rude's stuff, but this one is better than usual.
hatrack
(59,584 posts)Thanks, Meeg!
Omaha Steve
(99,618 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I just skimmed the article, but I saw very good points made. If we all objected to one another's choices, hell we might just need 100 different planets to separate ourselves from one another.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Then she has to have it compounded by a smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous cretin with a cross up her ass.
ellennelle
(614 posts)one that could easily be extended to the police and even the military (though this latter can get a bit dicey); might an officer refuse to protect a prostitute who is being beaten by her pimp? might a soldier refuse to protect his buddy because the guy is muslim. (though obviously this latter, as noted, does get dicey; the entire military training enterprise based, as it is, on dehumanizing the enemy, 'other'-izing them, so war will 'work'. see krauts, japs, kikes, russkies, reds, sand monkeys etc. ad nauseam.....)
clearly, at the very least, professional organizations should be requiring conscience clauses of their own, ones that insist - as say, the medical profession does - that 'do no harm' is the fundamental and defining principle of all these professions of service. if you dream of being a firefighter or a doctor or a school nurse or a policeman or a pharmacist (even a dentist, fer chrissake), your oath should be always to serve those in need. period. end of discussion. then, if any of these jamooks want to defer first to their religious dictates, abandoning their professional oath, that's fine. but they then lose their license to practice, are fired from the force, are stripped of their front line active duties.
which would then beg the question: why did they take the oath in the first place? why did they even dream of serving others first, when their real allegiance is to an antiquated and inhumane religious cultic dictate?
but really, we need not go that far. why aren't these people being asked to apply the words of their supposed savior? i mean really; it's not that hard to determine what jesus would do in these instances.
the internal contradictions these people carry around in their heads day in and day out make my brain burn.
bottom line for approaching this problem, though, is we should be targeting the national and state professional organizations to threaten the licenses of the religious fanatics; the states that refuse should be denied acceptance at the national level, where we should apply the greatest pressure. i say this because as a psychologist, we went through years of hell getting the APA to impose a 'no torture' principle. it was the most shameful episode in my profession's history, and parallels could be drawn between that and what is happening with these religious fanatics. the APA was in bed with military for funding tons of research (much of it nefarious), and begging the congress to allow psychologists to prescribe drugs. the APA could justify this exception to 'do no harm' because they knelt at the altar of the almighty dollar.
and so it goes....
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)They don't need to worry, what with all the insurance companies and politicians and busybodies that are already there.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)handmade34
(22,756 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,844 posts)We're watching the country unravel, and it's depressing as hell.
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)Favorite bit:
Damn straight.
Lucky Luciano
(11,254 posts)Augiedog
(2,545 posts)Self deluded weekend Christains actually are pro abortion they just pretend they are not. They champion war and in doing so they promot sending men and women to combat zones to die so that they, the weekend Christains, can squeal gleefully about how righteous they have become. But they studiously ignore that every human who dies at their behest in war is a potential father or mother. This being true by definition, each death also kills sperm and eggs that their God put in each human and was supposed to be used for procreation; the only christain use for sexual intercourse and reason for existing on earth, pending the apocalypse that is. So war is by their own standards infanticide at least and more accurately group abortion.
catbyte
(34,376 posts)Paladin
(28,254 posts)TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)mnhtnbb
(31,384 posts)I'm so sick of these smug, self-righteous types. They all so conveniently forget the admonition
to not judge others at the peril of being judged, or to look at their own failings before trying to
correct others.
Matthew 7:1-3New International Version (NIV)
Judging Others
7 Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brothers eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
valerief
(53,235 posts)The Wizard
(12,545 posts)are licensed and regulated by the State and as such required to carry out orders considered legal and regulated by the State.
When the State fails to hold accountable those it licenses and someone is damaged by the licensee's failure to act because the State allows for exemptions based on belief and not empirical information, the the State is therefore held responsible for damages.
If the State abdicates its responsibility to apply its laws and regulations in deference to an imaginary sky hero, then the State forgoes its governance and ability to enforce the law, and as such subject to legal sanctions at a higher level such as the Federal Courts.
When State Treasuries get depleted to satisfy the whims and superstitions of a select few then the State will adjust its policies.
marym625
(17,997 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)NoMoreRepugs
(9,417 posts)big K&R
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)"Conscience clauses" use the same sick inversion of logic -- to permit people to hurt those they irrationally hate -- over and again.
They need to go, as do the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act" used to justify Hobby Lobby and every similar law.
Everyone's religious "freedom" ends at abusing or discriminating against others who don't share your views. The fact that a few demented people think their metaphysical belief system puts them in charge of everyone else's sex lives notwithstanding.
thucythucy
(8,048 posts)violating your religion, and lead an absolutely sin-free and temptation-free life of faith, you'd join a convent or monastery or ashram or some such community of likeminded religious people. That's what those institutions are for.
We seem to have evolved to a point where some people want to turn the entire nation into their own personal convent or monastery.
I'm somewhat torn on this, in that I do believe people should try to live their lives according to their principles as best they can. I know an engineer, for instance, who refuses to work on projects funded by or related to the DoD. That's his decision, his choice, and good for him.
But what's happening now is some religious folk are expecting society to work around them and their faith, rather than them navigating their own lives to be consistent with that faith.
Basically, they're too lazy--and too much a part of the secular society they seem to despise--to cut the cord and join a religious community. That would involve sacrifice on their part, whereas they'd prefer the rest of us sacrifice so they won't have to.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)saying this had happened to them. A lot of people saying they will pray for her, etc. led me to believe they identify as "Christian" of some sort. Surprisingly, no one blasted her for her somewhat pro-choice stance. But not one person put 2 + 2 together and say, "Hey, maybe we shouldn't vote for the people who are every second working actively to take away our rights." Maybe there will be a collective awakening.
Novara
(5,841 posts)....with their Hobby Lobby decision. Remember when there used to be a separation of church and state? Remember when people used to actually respect that someone might have a different belief than their own? Live and let live?
Your freedom of religion doesn't mean you can shame me with it and force me to live as you believe I should. My freedom of religion is to be free of YOURS.
Leith
(7,809 posts)It's even more fun to read the essay using the voice of Christopher Hitchens.
niyad
(113,284 posts)*********Conservatives like to talk about "special rights" for different groups. An exclusion from the duties of your profession is pretty much the picture book definition of "special rights." *******
we need to point this out every single time we hear them whining about how damned persecuted THEY are.
Alkene
(752 posts)do I go ahead and apply to the Department of Comparative Medicine (animal testing) and expect modification of my responsibilities? This comes to mind from personal choice.
Not a perfect analogy, except I would think that the hiring (and application) process would screen out applicants who can't bring themselves to perform certain duties intrinsic to their job.
Or can I work at McDonald's and only serve what I consider to be healthful menu items? That would make for an inactive shift.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)One is a liberal. The other a hard core fundie christian.
Guess who Im freinds with?
A: The one who fulfills her professional obligations, doesnt disregard the doctor's orders and respects women's choices.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,173 posts)Coming soon?
Kber
(5,043 posts)Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)you did it again. Fucking fuckity love it.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Keep your damned infantile religulous bullshit to yourself and do your fucking job. If you don't want to do the job, leave it.
benld74
(9,904 posts)Suppose injuries occur to both firefighters fighting the fire AND those inside the building. The victims are brought to a hospital whose ER staff AGAIN belongs to that same church. THEY in turn refuse to assist the patients!
matt819
(10,749 posts)if I think that the Rude Pundit should be designated a national treasure?
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Stainless
(718 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 15, 2015, 08:02 PM - Edit history (1)
Fire them and make them beg for help feeding their families and paying their bills.
longship
(40,416 posts)They call it religious freedom. I call it religious repression.
I am sick and tired of these fucking church people.
A prescient look back by an absolutely brilliant, and dearly missed person.
kairos12
(12,858 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)One of the few who write about what happens to us in misogynist culture. Who even bothers to remember we exist and have a whole other experience.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)if you can't do the work, don't take the job. Period.
Initech
(100,068 posts)Flatpicker
(894 posts)But, I don't want to paint with that broad a brush.
If everybody said "fuck your conscience, do your job."
Then corporate whistleblowing and good government info leaks would not have happened.
I just don't know how to understand when it's ok for your conscience to override your job duties?
Slippery Slope problem? Or am I over thinking it.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I took it to just be about forcing your beliefs on others or to judge whether others are deserving of your service. I did not take it to encompass when you see wrong doing not to call it out. That wouldn't be denying others service, service which it is your job to perform.
But I agree with where you are going with it.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)then don't take a job which has the job description of filling prescriptions.
Easy peasy.
ejbr
(5,856 posts)required me to punch that bitch in the face when she refused, would I be able?