Supreme Court rejects pharmacists' religious rights appeal

[AGENT J]

What about book stores and books?

In a free society, the owner decides what products he wants to sell. If he chooses to sell a particular product, he might need to adhere to certain regulations. He should not, however, be forced to sell anything.

book stores =/= pharmacy
facts: there is no force

already been down this path you couldnt provided one fact that supports your false claim of force, that hasn't changed. If it has though please post it in your next post. Please provide us with the facts that show force. Thanks

 

[AGENT J]

It is on topic as the concept is identical. Thus, there is no diversion.

the concept is not identical in anyway LMAO
A book store not selling a book about alaska for some reason is NOT violating any laws, or right or protocols or requirements for being a pharmacy.
A pharmacist choosing not to give me my heart meds, or pain meds or my wife's BC based on his religious views is

HUGE difference and not the same
Fact remains there is ZERO force and you have failed to even show the slightest hint of force, Let us know when you can.

and you are still dodging my questions.

Can a gas station only sell soda and nothing else and still get all the classifications of a gas station? tax breaks, incentives, or whatever they may get?
Im a christian, if i become a cop can i choose to only enforce the laws of my god?
or what if i become a judge, im going to base all my rulings on the bible?

If i can't do those things then by your failed logic you are "FORCING" me too and violate my religion . . . cant wait to hear how this is "magically" different

 

[Cryptic]

Because that's not what's being talked about. In fact, I already addressed if the OWNERS of the pharmacy don't want to stock things. We're talking about individual EMPLOYEE pharmacists who want to violate their employers instructions for religious reasons.

You still need to do some reading. In this case, that reading is on post one, page one of this thread. It very clearly links to the case under discussion in this thread.

 

[Cephus]

You still need to do some reading. In this case, that reading is on post one, page one of this thread. It very clearly links to the case under discussion.

Maybe you haven't figured out that threads don't stick to a single topic and that people talk about all kinds of related things that are not covered by the OP.

 

[Cryptic]

A pharmacist choosing not to give me my heart meds, or pain meds or my wife's BC based on his religious views is

More fictitious rights. Under the constitution, neither you, nor I have any "rights" to buy a product at a particular place.

Im a christian, if i become a cop can i choose to only enforce the laws of my god?
or what if i become a judge, im going to base all my rulings on the bible?

Apples to Oranges. Police and judges are very different occupations from "private business owner".

Can a gas station only sell soda and nothing else and still get all the classifications of a gas station? tax breaks, incentives, or whatever they may get?

And if the government wanted to take away a tax incentive (an incentive is a bonus that is not guaranteed) as the drug store is not a full service pharmacy, that would be a different matter. Instead, they are forcing him to sell products he does not want to sell.

Let me guess, would you force all restaraunts to also serve alcohol?

Maybe you haven't figured out that threads don't stick to a single topic and that people talk about all kinds of related things that are not covered by the OP.

Ok, post a link to the case that you are discussing.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)More fictitious rights. Under the constitution, neither you, nor I have any "rights" to buy a product at a particular place.
2.)Apples to Oranges. Police and judges are very different occupations from "private business owner".
3.)And if the government wanted to take away a tax incentive (an incentive is a bonus that is not guaranteed) as the drug store is not a full service pharmacy, that would be a different matter. Instead, they are forcing him to sell products he does not want to sell.
4.)Let me guess, would you force all restaraunts to also serve alcohol?

1.) where did i say we have "rights to buy a product at a particular place." Please qoute it . . . oh thats right, i didnt its lie and strawman you made up
2.) really? so THIS is apples to oranges (and we notice you didn't use all my examples, VERY telling and how convenient LMAO) but book store and pharmacy are the same? :lamo
a pharmacy isnt private in this case its public access and has rules and laws governing it
3.) LMAO wrong there is factually ZERO force as proven bt many posters and this thread and your inability to provide any facts showing there is.

Why your failed claims are so busted you cant even post honestly without lies and strawman and magical claims of thats different

4.) when did restaurants become governed by laws and the FDA to serve alcohol? oh thats right, they are not LMAO

but lets play your failed example game and use this stuff against you.
I'm a christian, I own a restaurant . . I refuse to sell my food to anybody that isn't christian . . is that ok in your opinion?

 

[yankintx]

Perhaps the pharamist is in the wrong profession. He should try the clergy

 

[Cryptic]

I'm a christian, I own a restaurant . . I refuse to sell my food to anybody that isn't christian . . is that ok in your opinion?

No, but you can refuse to cook and sell pork chops.

a pharmacy isnt private in this case its public access and has rules and laws governing it

Here we go again, just because regulations exist, does not mean they are constitutional.

No, the pharmacy has not been communalized. It is a private buisiness. The fact that it is a public accomodation does not mean they can be compelled to sell certain products. The government can provide incentives for them to do so, but cant require it.

the concept is not identical in anyway LMAO
A book store not selling a book about alaska for some reason is NOT violating any laws, or right or protocols or requirements for being a pharmacy.
A pharmacist choosing not to give me my heart meds, or pain meds or my wife's BC based on his religious views is

Are you sure you did not create a fictitious "right" to buy products at a certain business?

 

[AGENT J]

1.)No, but you can refuse to cook and sell pork chops.
2.)Here we go again, just because regulations exist, does not mean they are constitutional.
3.)No, the pharmacy has not been communalized.
4.) It is a private business. The fact that it is a public accommodation does not mean they can be compelled to sell certain products. The government can provide incentives for them to do so, but cant require it.
5.)Are you sure you did not create a fictitious "right" to buy products at a certain business?

1.) then by your logic you are FORCING me to associate with people i dont want and violate my religion, why are you doing that ?
(here comes the magically different train)
2.) yes here we go again with your same failed and destroyed strawman. Nobody said that . . you repeating it only shows that you have no logical, accurate and factual path to take to defend your false claims.
Disagree? then simply quote me saying the lie you just made up, thanks
3.) and yet another strawman, never said it was communalized . . quote please?
4.) nobody is complaining it, its required to do so to be that entity. Just like I can't claim to be a hospital and only sell snow cones LMAO
5.) yes 100% positive as facts prove LMAO if you disagree then simply quote me saying the lie you made up, we are waiting

Fact remains there is no force and your strawmen have been destroyed one by one.
Now please in your next post simply post fact that supports your false claim of force . . . ONE, thank you
opcorn2: