I believe firmly in the seperation of Church and State. Stores are inanimate objects.. "IT" and shouldn't have a religious belief..it is the owners. And to NOT provide a drug when it is a drug store is ridiculous. What if the owner said it went against their beliefs to serve African Americans? Or Gays? It is a store and they should sell all drugs..leave religion out of it!

Agreed CYL

Every woman should have the option to buy birth control within a reasonable distance to their home. It's their choice whether to buy it or not and the owner of a pharmacy should have absolutely no say in what a person can or cannot buy as long as it is legal and reasonable.

It would be one thing to have gas stations refuse to sell condoms or even grocery stores but a PHARMACY is a place where people go to buy things that they need to take care of themselves. Birth control is a must. These people are just as bad as people who will only teach creationism in schools and refuse to teach evolution. They are attempting to force their beliefs on people.

I live in Virginia. I think this is fine. For every Roman Catholic Pharmacy there are 100's of regular ones that sell whatever is prescribed. Does it matter if a PRIVATELY OWNED BUSINESS (Not a governmental agency, not part of any federal, state, or local government) chooses to sell or not sell things? It's the business owner's right. The business itself is not inanimate...the building it is in is, but the actual business is run by the owner and his employees.

For that matter, there is a whole network of hospitals in Virginia (Bon Secours network) that WILL NOT perform tubal ligation or vastectomy. If you want to give birth in the hospital, you are informed that you will not have the chioce to have your tubes tied. It is a CAtholic based church, and I think that is fine as there are atleast 2 more hospitals literally 10 miles away. so it isn't like you don't have choices. That particular hospital and it's associated hospitals have the best benefits offered to nurses in the area actually. My fiance didn't apply because he didn't agree, but hospitals (unless assocaited with a teaching university) are, for the most part, private and FOR PROFIT. I didn't even know that until he decided to become a nurse. I thought they were all non-profit.

I know that was long winded, but if we allow the government (whether it be federal, state, or local) to tell a private business owner that they can't do something, what's next? I realize that there are federal agencies (FDA, etc) that regulate things in private industry to ensure our safety, but selling or not selling birth control/condoms/etc does not effect our safety.

I agree that as a privately owned business, these people have a right to set their own agenda. However, shouldn't there also be a patients' bill of rights? Shouldn't women not have to drive to the next county to get a perfectly legal, privately prescribed medication for themselves?

It's still outrageous to me that pro-life people think denying people contraception will solve any problems. I get the Catholic viewpoint, but inaccessible contraception leads to unwanted pregnancies.

Fallen,

I don't want a heated argument, but just want to ask a question: Isn't someone telling me that I have to do something against my religious beliefs because they don't agree in essence forcing their beliefs on me as well? I realize that it may not be fair to the people who don't feel that way (I am not Catholic, so this is not my personal belief) but I would just choose to take my money elsewhere. If there isn't a closer pharmacy, I would order online or make a special trip.

Hope this doesn't seem argumentative, like I said, not trying to fight as per is our usual lol

Er, if they dont believe in contraception, including condoms, birth control pills, and the morning-after pill, then why should they have to sell it?

Virginians can go to whatever Rite Aide, CVS, Walgreen's or a grocery store that also has a pharmacy.

And if they live in a rural area that only has one pharmacy, then they can get the prescriptions online and through the mail.

And Chantilly, Va is hardly a rural area.

Princess: I am not trying to push that agenda, but I don't think that it is an agenda. The people that own and run those pharmacies feel they are doing what is right for humanity. In their eyes, they are trying to be sin free. Whether you are religious, to any religion or not, isn't the point, and whether we don't agree isn't the point; it's their right to do that because that is what this great country was founded on: religious freedom. And that is why people moved and developed new settlements...because maybe they didn't agree with what those people said, so they went to do their own thing.

UIK: I live in Northnern VA...within 2 miles of my apartment I can access 5 different pharmacies...I will atually be working in Chantilly in 2 weeks. Good point!

Thank you cravin!

If we're not going to make businesses like Chick Fil A or Ukrops be open on Sundays, I dont think we have to make pharmacists prescribe drugs that they feel are against their religion.

And did I LOVE working at Chick-Fil-A when I was in school! A guaranteed day off a week was magical! lol

How is the store now running the owners? That's not a fair argument, are you saying that if I have a movie store I have to supply porn? Its a violation of the owners right of religion to force him to sell something he does not believe in. Go to a different pharmacy! Stop infringing on that person's rights because you don't see a problem with it. I personally don't have a problem with birth control, but I'm not going to force someone who does to sell it. Pharmacies are not part of the government, so please stop using the argument separation of church and state. Are you going to say that chickfila has to be open on Sunday because everyone else is? Someone who needs birth control can buy it else where, she has many options. The person who owns the pharmacy only has one chance to live the life that they see as best.

I just have a thought on a statement made in the original post: "If women can't have access to birth control, many will be faced with decisions about how to deal with unwanted pregnancies."

It seems like no one even considers not having sex as an option. It's a pretty amazing thing that we can do something that creates a life - the statement should more accurately read "If women can't have access to birth control, many will be faced with decisions about how to deal with their sexuality and the consequence of reproductive availability.

Is it our right to have sex? Yes, just as it's our right to eat nothing but chocolate. But we haven't yet found a way to medicate our way out of the consequences of eating too much chocolate and so we restrain ourselves, finding that there is also a freedom in acknowledging consequences and adjusting our actions accordingly.

PS i appreciate the thoughtful posts here - so often these blogs produce angry comments instead of discussion!

Not all pro-life people do are against birth control and condoms! That's not fair at all to say. I personally have no problem with it and I'm definitely against abortion. Why is being pro-life mean you are also in support of abstinence-only teaching? Its two completely different ideas.

And the religious belief behind this is that God decides everything and if you get pregnant from sex that baby is supposed to be, and if you are using a contraceptive then you are going against God's plan for your life, if they want to believe that they can. I don't, why can't they? It doesn't hurt anyone. You may disagree all you want, but you can't force anyone against that.

Cravinsugar and 356UIK, you make me miss NOVA so much! I grew up in Centreville (next to Chantilly) and went to college in Williamsburg. I loved that Chick Fil A and Ukrops could be closed on Sunday, even it it was sometimes an inconvenience.

And, to actually make this relevant to the topic- I totally agree with you both on the subject. As a brand new nurse we were taught that if you have a religious objection to certain procedures in health care you can't be forced to participate. One of the big ways you can accommodate your beliefs is by working at facilities like this (or hospitals affiliated with certain religions). If you do not work at such a facility, you can talk with your supervisor and have your beliefs made known so that your position is understood so that you won't be given patients having those procedures. If you think about it, it could be very difficult to provide excellent and objective care to a patient undergoing a procedure that you find objectionable. Given that Chantilly has a HUGE amount of drug stores, this fills a niche and provides care for a specific group. I'd much rather have this than the possibility of pharmacists or other health care providers unconsciously giving substandard care concerning treatments they object to.

Longest post ever... but as a final point. Chantilly VA falls within the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, which is one of the most conservative in the country. I am a Catholic so I am biased, but it makes sense for this business to be in Chantilly where there is a group of people who will use it.

Well independently owned pharmacies can choose what they have in stock. But I would never go there b/c I dont believe religion and business should go hand and hand. Thank god for national chains, my beloved CVS would never leave me hanging!

So if I think religious nuts are too stupid to be allowed to procreate, can I deny them fertility drugs?

What if the owner said it went against their beliefs to serve African Americans? Or Gays?

Let's be honest, it's not that far fetched considering their line of thinking.

i have a daughter who takes medication that isn't typically stocked in pharmacies. if they aren't expecting her to get a refill or if we are out of town it's a problem. it can takes days to get the Rx. anyway, this is my way of saying that the legislature can "make" the pharmacies stock it, but if they run out there you go. and who's going to wait days to get a bc refill?

i think people need to use their shopping dollars and not buy other things at these pharmacies.

CYL: "I believe firmly in the seperation of Church and State. "

I don't see how this is a church/state issue ... the pharmacy is not government-run.

My two cents: I don't necessarily have a problem with a pharmacy choosing not to stock certain drugs IF a) there are other nearby options for consumers; and b) the pharmacy says this up front and doesn't pull this nonsense of taking the prescription and refusing to give it back (so you can't go somewhere else and get the drug).

Problem is, in rural areas there are not that many places to fill prescriptions, and if the owner of a pharmacy in rural Montana decides he/she doesn't want to fill BC prescriptions, a whole lot of women are screwed. So this could set a dangerous precedent. In states that have historically not respected reproductive choice (South Dakota, anyone?) a whole lot of light bulbs just went off.

ummyeaitsmarcie, I wasn't in any way saying that abstinence only is the only stance taken by the pro-life movement - and rereading my post I can't figure out how it was interpreted that way.

I was simply pointing out that often not having sex isn't even presented as an option. And it is. Simple as that. I totally agree with your original post.

And to your point about abstinence-only teaching...I think it's often misconstrued. Teens know how to have sex. They know about birth control. They know about condoms (although in every school I've been in...yes I'm in sex-ed...jaws drop when they hear that STDs can be contracted be contact outside of the area covered by a condom - and these are places that have had other sex-ed classes!!) but what they don't know is how someone can live a normal life, date alot and have healthy relationships while deciding to have only 1 sexual partner in life.

cravinsugar, if they are against certain pharmaceuticals SO much that it starts to effect their business then I dont think they should be running a pharmacy or refusing to stock very standard and important things such as condoms.

This doesnt encourage people to not have sex unless they're ready for a baby.. this encourages young people to forget about using any form of contraceptives and just using the "pull-out" method instead. Condoms are something that should be available to anyone, anywhere, any age if they need them. Especially in a pharmacy. If your religion stops you from selling condoms... then open a McDonalds instead.

The best part about this is that women who are denied birth control (which some take for highly painful periods) or the morning after pill (also prescribed to RAPE victims, who've already been raped once, thank you) may end up pregnant, and since it would have been unwanted and a pregnancy they were TRYING to avoid, they'll likely get an abortion.

Hmm...prevent the pregnancy in the first place, or deny a woman access to contraceptives and there's another aborted baby? Good job, religious zealots.

I don't mean to put down anyone's beliefs, but there is absolutely no logic to this way of thinking. It's just ridiculous.

Sorry I should clear it up, I live in Canada and I forget its a different system. Here our drug program is in part subsidized by our government. Sorry about that, forgot for a moment the US is different.

Also, what about people who are married, but don't want 10 kids? I guess these morons want the wife barefoot and pregnant for over a decade, even if the couple can't afford it.

Why bother with responsible family planning? Nah, just live off of welfare indefinitely!

It sets a bad precedent. I see a lot of "well there's tons of pharmacies there!" But what if other pharmacies in rural areas start following suit? Also, birth control is not always prescribed just for pregnancy prevention - what about regulating periods and cramps?

And laura85712 - best comment ever!!!

brown eyed girl, The married ones who are done having kids I think are supposed to practice the rhythm method...not positive tho.

laura85712, Yes, if you become a fertility doctor and set up a private practice I think you can definitely pick and chose who you decide to provide your services to.

I have to say this, then i am done with the post: It doesn't matter how ridiculous or great you think the idea is of a business owner refusing to sell something that goes against their religious beliefs. Why? Because that is a guaranteed right of being a citizen of our country: religious freedom. If it is a private run business. No one has to agree that it is a good or bad idea. It doesn't matter.

It's interesting that the Roman Catholic Church allows for the use of birth control pills if a women needs them for hormonal reasons, but do not approve of their use as contraception. It's the intent that's the problem.

I totally don't agree...hormones are still hormones, whether they're used to regulate cycles or to prevent pregnancy. If a Catholic pharmacy that doesn't sell contraceptives is the only one a woman has reasonable access to, and she needs birth control for regulating her cycle, what's she to do?

But if they don't want to sell contraceptives because of their beliefs, let them. If it hurts their sales and they go under because of not selling contraceptives (not terribly likely), then that's how it goes. I hope there's a CVS or a Walgreens or some other pharmacy (national chains usually don't take a stance on contraceptive use) nearby for people who would like to use contraceptives.

So is freeom of speech...doesn't mean you can go around shooting off saying whatever you want without consequence (ex..hate propaganda...).

What about people who aren't religious? Aren't they free not to have the views of other pressed upon them at the pharamacy? And why should they have to walk an extra 15 minutes to another pharamacy for pills if the pharamacy closets to their home is pressing THEIR religious views on them? Many people's pharamcists have detailed accounts of what medication a person is taking...so forcing someone to go to one pharamacy for BC and another for regular drugs is insane....and yes they could take their entire business to somewhere else..but the point is...where does that 'religion' excuse stop?

I have stated before...how far is it really from Gays/lesbians/transgendered individuals being refused treatment and service because some religious nut thinks that's unnatural and a sin to?

I am Catholic and I find this offensive. I cannot see how the Church can dictate what pills I take for medicinial reasons.

rickimc, the Church doesn't, as far I understand.

I'm not Catholic, but I just finished up at a Catholic university and have had this drilled into my head over the past 4 years about contraceptives:

If you *must* take hormonal pills for medicinal reasons (irregular cycles, excessive bleeding, whatever), then the use of hormonal pills is allowed. The other effect of the hormones preventing pregnancy is a "necessary evil", but it's not something to be condemned.
Using hormones for the *purpose* of preventing pregnancy (i.e. as birth control) is not accepted, as it goes against God's plan for sex as a procreative act.

So, if you're using hormonal pills as BIRTH CONTROL, that's not good. If you have to take them because of a medical issue, then that's acceptable, though I have heard they suggest trying other natural methods of managing those issues before using hormones [I don't know how well that works].

This sort of backs that up:
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=255886

Just to note, for the nice friendly community that is supposed to grow here, calling people who believe strongly in their religion nuts and other rude things is not positive.

It's actually a very interesting debate: the right to medical care versus the first amendment right to practice the religion of one's choosing.

I won't go into the whole thing here but I wrote a paper about it in law school.

Screw the catholics and take your Rx and money to CVS, there's no point in arguing with it. Chic-fil-a is christian and isn't open on sundays, is anyone raising a stink about that?

i think that it's definitely a complicated thing. i feel like there are ways to get contreception if you're not able to get it at a store by you. a lot of doctors have access to online prescriptions, and that way you can order it and have it shipped and you don't have to go through the pharmacy.

there are so many religious obstacles depending on how you choose to practice, and this is just another example of how different people live their lives.

the problem with that, ilanac, is that some people - a lot of people, surprisingly - don't have internet access.

in addition, there are people who don't have 15 pharmacies within a 3 mile radius -- and don't have a choice.

it isn't a church/ state issue, because pharmacies are privately owned.

hey how about you get your BC prescription at CVS or Target or any other chain that isn't INSANE. this is not as bad as working for a Catholic hospital where the insurance WILL NOT cover BC. i knew someone who that happened to. paid well, but the insurance wouldn't cover her BC.

I might get attacked for saying this but i'm just going to put it out there; what about the young people who can't get to a pharmacy in the next county, and can't ask for a ride there to pick up condoms because their parents don't know? I am NOT saying I condone 14 year olds having sex, but we all know it happens, and depriving them of birth control is not going to do anything positive. They'll just write it off as, oh well I can't get b.c. in this town so i'll just go without.

While this pharmacy is trying to reduce abortion rates, they're really just going to escalate it.

Private business or not, there is a serious problem with denying access to certain medications versus others.

I bet they supply Viagra and Cialis. It wouldn't surprise me if they sold personal lubricants as well.

They are a purveyor of certain goods (i.e. medicine and medicine supplies) and unless they are going to remove ALL goods related to sexual activity, they are obligated to provide them.

Providers of medical care/services/supplies cannot place their moral/ethical judgments over their patients' health.

There are privately-owned hospitals all over America and they are required by law to provide women's health services as equally as they provide men's health services.

Amandaletta-- LOL, , I deal with it by not eating there! Actually, I had no idea there was a religious stake in Chick-fil-a. LOL.

(Well, as far as I am aware they have to provide those services.) Please let me know if I am wrong.

It's one thing to not use birth control for themselves. That's fine. It's another thing for them to deny others birth control and therefore hindering another person's rights. But, hey, they have the right to sell whatever they want. I would just take my money elsewhere. I wouldn't want to support a business founded on religious zealotry.

Just another reason why I hate religion.

psychobabble, "VA falls within the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, which is one of the most conservative in the country. I am a Catholic so I am biased, but it makes sense for this business to be in Chantilly where there is a group of people who will use it."

Good point! And it is a highly populated area so it seems there is a niche for it as far as the economic aspect of supply and demand goes.

So... next they stop carrying medication to treat AIDS, because they can't interfere with "God's judgment against homosexuals".

Then they stop allowing transsexuals to buy hormones because they're "interfering with God's plan for their bodies".

Then they pre-emptively refuse to carry any medications derived from Sten Cell research.

Then they refuse to carry any medications designed to treat mental illness because they subscribe to the views of the Citizen's Commission on Human Rights International, i.e. that there is no such thing as a mental illness.

Then the Christian Scientists announce that *their* pharmacists will not distribute any medications to treat any conditions that could possibly be addressed through prayer.

Then, the various religious groups will get it in their heads that they must boycott any pharmacies that carry products that violate their religious principles, forcing even more pharmacies to start restricting their offerings.

A path we want to start going down? Letting every pharmacy pick and choose what they will and won't provide? Pharmacists are able to practice because they are licensed by the state. In most cases they have received their education at taxpayer-supported colleges. Their entire industry is regulated by the government, and they can't even sell any drugs not tested and approved by the FDA. They hold a position of public trust.

Oh and those Catholic hospitals? Tax exempt, just like any other hospital. Shouldn't they be expected to make some sacrifices for the public in exchange for that tax exemption?

How about if all business decide to start picking and choosing their customers based on their religious preferences? If a Catholic wants to build a pharmacy in which they only sell drugs in accordance with their religious beliefs, then should I, as a protestant and the owner of the only construction supply store within 50 miles, have the right to refuse to sell to them? As the only plumber within 50 miles, should I have the right to refuse to answer their service calls? As the only bank in town, should I have a right to deny them a loan?

No, I shouldn't, because Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminating against someone based on their religious beliefs.

So the real question is: should that protection be a one way street? Should that Catholic pharmacy get a pass on discriminating against customers by refusing to sell them a legal, medically beneficial, product because they disagree with the religious beliefs of the person purchasing the product?

Is this different than a doctor or hospital refusing service to an unwed pregnant woman? Is this different than an electric company refusing to sell electricity to homes in which unmarried adults are living together? If this any different than the only grocery store in town deciding that they will no longer carry fish, just so the local Catholics have to drive 50 miles every Friday night to eat?

These pharmacists seems to be oblivious to the fact that they benefit EVERY DAY from the rest of the world not doing to them what they want to do to these women. When you live in a pluralistic society, you have to respect the views and decisions of other people exactly as much as you want them to respect yours.

I actually agree with cravinsugar on this one...

I have no problem with this at all, if you want it go to another store its the individual owners rights to carry what good and services they want to.

Okay, CG, but what about people who live in areas without easy access to another pharmacy?

ghostgrrl, very good points.

It's one thing for a small pharmacy in a large metropolitan area to carry only what they deem necessary but as others have pointed out, it's a completely different thing for the only pharmacy in the town to refuse to carry birth control pills and condoms! I completely agree that the FDA should be stepping in and making the owners choose: Either offer condoms and BC or close your store and let someone less judgmental open a pharmacy.