Perhaps the story should have started "Two Washington pharmacists and a pharmacy owner have sued the State of Washington for trampling on their right to punish dirty sluts."

How long before we see stocks beside the blood pressure machines?

If it's against their religion to dispense anything that might conceivably harm a fetus - they should open a chamomile tea shop, allowing only one cup per female customer.

I've wondered the same, graphictruth. Why choose a profession that puts them into a position that goes contrary to their belief system. Pacifist as mercenary; vegan as butcher; acrophobic as pilot. Some things just don't fit.

I keep wondering when we're going to hear about a pharmacist who decided that it was his religious obligation to verify if a man bringing in a prescription for Viagra is married or single, and then refuses to sell it to an unmarried man. I mean, you'd think they'd be doing that now, if they're so concerned about making sure they're not selling any prescriptions for things they consider contrary to their religious beliefs....

I also have to wonder how many of these people refuse to fill prescriptions for AIDS medications, or other medications that can cause harm to fetus or which increase the possibility of a miscarriage.

It's those little inconsistencies that make it so clear what their game really is.

Even though well meaning we can all be influenced by our culture. Thank you, thorswitch, for pointing this out. I have this view of myself as being pretty free of prejudice but the fact that I didn't even consider the "Viagra problem" shows that I have some ways still to go. You're absolutely right in your response. Thank you.

I may be wrong here here but I can't recall a woman pharmacist ever being involved in this type of situation.