In all fairness, what would a devout Catholic who is obedient to the teachings of the Church do in this same situation? Genuinely curious.

Posted by: Madame Vengier at October 4, 2008 9:36 PM

A devout Catholic or Protestant should refuse, but even if they want to they don't have the right to refuse selling this murder pill in the U.S.

They would be sued into oblivion and the liberal press would eat them alive. I have already seen a news story about this in the States regarding a Christian pharmacist.

In addition, the company would not support that same Christian pharmacist and would fire them, not run to their support as in this situation.

Of course, abortion and birth control is the whole reason for the population shift England is experiencing in the first place...

I know all you pro-abortion/birth control people will say it's immigration, but it's the killing and prevention of the their own children through abortion/birth control which will be the cause of the ultimate population shift of Europe.

Posted by: adobe at October 4, 2008 10:04 PM

Thanks adobe for making my point. Why criticize a muslim for doing what you approve of? So I take it you are anti birth control too, what a reacionary.

Posted by: MorrisMinor at October 4, 2008 10:20 PM

I support what this Muslim did.

Though today's Western democracies may be "post-Christian", the traditional morality of the West considers abortion and contraception to be morally aberrant. Whether most people believe this, a considerable number do, and it ought to be respected.

If this man we refusing to sell pork it might be another story . . .

Posted by: DominvsVobiscvm at October 4, 2008 10:45 PM

I'm on the Muslim's side on this one. The so-called morning after pill will induce abortion if the egg has been fertilized. Life begins at conception, therefore he'd be complicit in the taking of an innocent life.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. This is all science. And murder is murder.

Posted by: Mo at October 4, 2008 11:06 PM

Outrageous! This pill is legal and available on request in pharmacies, and should thus be sold on request. Moral issues such as the ones some are raising here are to be discussed and decided in parliament, not by some pharmacist imposing his opinion.

I lose hope when I read reactionary opinions like the ones above (one even opposing contraception!!). No wonder so few liberals join our movement against jihad!

BTW, the fact that western people (yes, men and women together) choose to have fewer children is part of our civilised development: quality, not quantity. Fewer children per family, but properly educated and provided for is the modern ideal.

I can't believe people on this forum want to drag us back to the middle ages. Go and live in Afghanistan then: 7.5 children per woman, second highest maternal mortality rate in the world, about 50% of children born stunted.

The planet can only take replacement rate at this stage - certainly in the UK. Average UK citizens are making sensible decisions about reproduction. Time for muslims to join our century.

Posted by: Lili at October 4, 2008 11:19 PM

"A Tesco spokesman said the pharmacist was acting within his rights to refuse to sell the pill ..."

It sounds like Tesco is okay with his decision, so I side with the company. You may disagree with a company, and in that case, you are free to take your business elsewhere. Now if the pharmacist had been hired by a store that carries these drugs and the store was not okay with his refusal to disperse them, I'd side with the store in that situation, too, and let the manager fire him.

In fact, the only time I wouldn't side with the business owner was if the policy changed after the employee was hired. (If, for example, they didn't carry the drug when the pharmacist was hired, I don't think they should be able to fire him over a refusal to disperse should they decide to start carrying the drugs later.)

And incidentally, that's the same position I held when I heard of instances of this with Christian pharmacists.

Posted by: CJ at October 4, 2008 11:56 PM

Thank you, Lili.

It never ceases to amaze me how many threads - even ones that have nothing to do with morning-after pills - degenerate into diatribes against abortion.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at October 5, 2008 1:34 AM

This is probably not a real helpful thread.

Posted by: Connie at October 5, 2008 2:46 AM

adobe:
I know all you pro-abortion/birth control people will say it's immigration, but it's the killing and prevention of the their own children through abortion/birth control which will be the cause of the ultimate population shift of Europe.

Immigrants are reason for the population shift. If there weren't immigrants, how would a population shift take place? Japan suffers from an excessively low birth rate, but you don't see a population shift taking place there. Not enough immigration.

And here's a newsflash for you: a puddle of sperm is not a living being by any stretch of the imagination, and neither is a newly formed embryo. You are saying that denying the possibility of a future birth is murder. In that case, I must be murdering babies left and right since I'm not having sex with anyone.

Mo:
Life begins at conception.

No it doesn't. You can harbor whatever moral beliefs you want to, but don't try to justify them using pseudo-science.

I cannot believe the Royal Pharmaceutical Society actually allows pharmacists to refuse to sell a product because of personal beliefs. It's not their job to decide what a customer should or should not purchase. If a customer can legally purchase something then the pharmacist should be required by law to either sell it, have another employee sell it or find a new job. While they're at it, why don't they allow pharmacists to deny service to people based on race, gender, sexual orientation, political beliefs and appearance?

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at October 5, 2008 3:16 AM

What poor Ruth Johnson didn't realize is that she was talking, in the person of the mohammedan "pharmacist", to her self-appointed superior.

Her rights, expectations and the normal practices of her culture count for nothing in his eyes, nor I suspect would that thing we call common decency.

Believe me when I tell you that if a Christian pharmacist had refused her in this way there would be a three alarm public uproar, hearings in parliament, and a full court press by the media.

There won't be in this case.

Historically invaders achieve such prerogatives by superior force. In this case they have gained their advantage through the cowardice and stupidity of their opponents.

Neither does the poor dear realize that this is what a "multi-cultural society" means!

Oh well ...

Maybe she'll remember this the next time she goes to the voting booth, but I doubt it.

Posted by: joeblough at October 5, 2008 3:19 AM

If the company (Tesco) has a policy which allows this practice, it should have a replacement person from somewhere else in the store to complete the transaction.
Like when they have a checkout with Muslim staff who is unwilling to touch alcohol or pork products. Same principle applies. Business is business.

Of course the customer is inconvenienced and humiliated in the process, but hey! We are multiculturalist! Think community cohesion, tolerance, inclusiveness. A small price to pay.
And they can always go elsewhere if the y don't like it.

The point is that religious morals are forced upon people who may not wish to agree with it.
That is coercion.
Remember your constitution? Freedom from religion? What happened to that?

Yeah. Right.

Posted by: pr126 at October 5, 2008 4:46 AM

Sorry to hurt you, but in this case, I fully approve the Muslim pharmacists!

I am against Islam only when it is against natural law! In this case, not Islam, but the "Western civilisation" is against natural law.

Islam kills legally as to islamic criteria with its jihadists ...

The West kills legally as to western criteria with its abortionists ... (and RU 486 and morning-after pills, and IUD, ...)

SO, I am ready to work with Muslims in order to fight abortion genocide as well as I am ready to work with western laicists to fight jihad genocide.

Posted by: Coaltaxopeuh at October 5, 2008 4:55 AM

And please, let's skip the biology 101 which is interpreted and twisted to justify a [religious] agenda.

As a side note: nearly 7 billion humans on the planet already. Resources are finite.
If the gods wanted unlimited numbers of humans, should have provided unlimited resources too.

On the other hand, if you prefer overpopulation, poverty, hunger, pestilence, ignorance, oppression and wars with regular culling of the herd...

Wait. We have that already. Africa. Middle East. Asia. South America.
Carry on.

Posted by: pr126 at October 5, 2008 5:10 AM

Coaltaxopeuh:
I am against Islam only when it is against natural law! In this case, not Islam, but the "Western civilisation" is against natural law.

By your definition everything from airplanes to antibiotics is against "natural law." If you like "natural law" so much, then go live in the bushes.

The West kills legally as to western criteria with its abortionists ... (and RU 486 and morning-after pills, and IUD, ...)

I just killed, like, ten babies by first thinking about getting children and then deciding not to. Is that how it works? Am I a murderer now?

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at October 5, 2008 5:48 AM

Perhaps its time to send him back to Pakistan. God knows what other pills he'd deny to women. What if he starts denying them heart tablets etc?

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at October 5, 2008 6:09 AM

"Life begins at conception, therefore he'd be complicit in the taking of an innocent life.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. This is all science."
What?! Whhhat?! Really? Since when? Life "begins"? Assuming that "life begins" is extra-scientifical. It's neither true nor false, but it's not a scientific question. Science can't deal with it. Scientific criteria cannot decide the matter.

Since the moment we had the first microscope and we created the new concepts of embryo and fetus, we reached a new and impossible to resolve existencial problem: animal/human life doesn't exactly "begin", nor continues it from earlier stages. You can think it's an easy problem, do it, delude yourselves.

When you study the subject, even superficially, the only thing you reach is doubt and bewilderment, not certainty.

Posted by: Neuropaco at October 5, 2008 6:19 AM

Hmmm. Now isn't this a sticky issue?

My .02c here.

I'm against abortion, but I can't see it ever being delegitimised (especially here in Australia). Since that is the case, I'd prefer that it was strictly regulated.

With respect to contraceptives, that's an individual decision. I disagree also with RU486, but again, not my decision.

For the pharmacist, however, he's in that job to dispense medicines, not proselytise and prate.

If his religion says he should refuse service to a customer then he shouldn't be in that job.

He has a choice, after all. He's living in a Western country, not Pakistan.

Same with christians who feel the same way. Find a workplace that supports your views, and those customers who appreciate your stance will follow you.

As mentioned above, of course, if it was a christian refusing service, there would be a lynch mob outside the store in 5...4...3.....

L.Drummond.

Posted by: L.Drummond at October 5, 2008 6:32 AM

@ Jesus Christ Super Cop: about NATURAL LAW

What I mean is in French "droit naturel". This is a notion of the law concerning the respect of the dignity of EACH human being, without any exception!

The Natural Law is the fact that each human being without any exception has natural rights only because he/she is a human being, even before his/her birth.

The following elements are against the "droit naturel", the natural law, and are thus EVIL:
- racism (against different persons: other people, unborn, ...);
- murder for any reason;
- inequality between man and woman, between born and unborn, between different people, ...
- irrespect of the freedom of thought, of speech and of religion,
- beating people,
- deception of any kind as irrespect of others: thefts, adulteries, ...

So, the western civilisation, as it kills its own children, is quite against the dignity of EACH human being.

Islam is too quite against the dignity of EACH human being, mostly on other topics.

Posted by: Coaltaxopeuh at October 5, 2008 6:59 AM

Jihadwatch is hardly a place for Christian or any other religious proselytising.

Posted by: pr126 at October 5, 2008 7:23 AM

Coaltaxopeuh:
The Natural Law is the fact that each human being without any exception has natural rights only because he/she is a human being, even before his/her birth.
You aren't born during conception.

The following elements are against the "droit naturel", the natural law, and are thus EVIL:
There are any number of scenarios where murder, deception and theft are morally justified or even a moral imperative (e.g. assassinating Hitler or deceiving him in order to steal his secret plans). As for beating people up, if self-defense isn't a natural right then I don't know what is. There are also valid reasons for abortion.

People can forfeit some of the rights they have through their own actions. For example, a person threatening my life forfeits his right to live.

Your moral beliefs are deeply flawed.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at October 5, 2008 8:07 AM

"The Natural Law is the fact that each human being without any exception has natural rights only because he/she is a human being, even before his/her birth."

What a load of drivel!
So where are all these human beings staying, before they are born? In heaven? Are they out there somewhere, floating around the atmosphere, just waiting for their mummy and daddy to do the deed and conceive them?

Female humans are born with all the eggs they will ever have already in their ovaries. What about all the eggs that are never fertilized and are shed every month with a woman's period? Who determines which egg will be fertilized and which one dies? What about miscarried fetuses? who decides which fetus will be carried to term and which will be naturally aborted? Oh yeah......I guess it must be god.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at October 5, 2008 8:13 AM

Life does not begin before fertilization. There's a huge difference between the morning after pill and an abortion. This once again goes to show how one cannot be a Muslim and simultaneously be a productive member of society or a good employee. According to his beliefs, he has no business being a phamacist, as Muslim medicine consists of - ready for the exhaustive list: camel piss, fly wings, and arguably Perv Mo's piss.

Posted by: jdamn at October 5, 2008 8:23 AM

Fear not my friends, I hear there is a project in the offing called 'Jesus Freak Watch' where all this fundamentalist waffling can take place and I'm sure before too long, common ground will be found and bridges built between those who agree with the Muslims on issues like this, a place where Godless harlots and shameless hussies can be condemned.
But for now I would suggest that in the 21st century we should put all this supernatural entity stuff to one side and agree that it should be kept out of the workplace and public services should be free from the delusional.

Posted by: Jihadtobejoking at October 5, 2008 8:35 AM

I think this Muslim's priorities are very mixed up. He would be doing a great service to Allah helping keep down the infidel demographics.

Abortion argument elsewhere people!

Posted by: poetcomic1 at October 5, 2008 10:14 AM

You'd think this muslim would happily jump at the chance to kill an infidel before it is even born!

Posted by: DJM at October 5, 2008 11:44 AM

Condoms?

Are condoms evil, too?

I wonder if this particular pharmacist sells condoms to men?

What do you want to bet he does?

The moral onus here is being placed upon the female. That's BS, guys.

This kills me--birth control is okay for men, because they might have to pay child support, if a child is born. (Ooooooh, MONEY!)

Meanwhile a woman, who will otherwise lose time, money, comfort, emotional security, much of the nutrition she takes into her body, in exchange for huge pain at the end of the pregancy, and the decision about whether or not to keep the infant, can't have the "morning after" pill, because it's immoral! I'm sorry, but that sucks!

Posted by: Abscedere at October 5, 2008 12:28 PM

@ Jesus Christ Supercop:

I agree, in certain circumstances, murder or theft can be JUSTIFIED! But this does not take away that it is evil. Demonstration: if it can be JUSTIFIED, it is because it is intrinsecally EVIL!
Only evil can be JUSTIFIED! If something is good, it does not need to be JUSTIFIED.

@ ImNoDhimmi:

The human beings do not exist before CONCEPTION (or fertilization). I am not a Mormon: I do not believe that the human beings exist before conception or fertilization.

Miscarried fetuses is accidental death.

@ Everybody:

The morning-after pill has, eventually, also a abortive effect as it could (not ever) hinder the implementation of the embryo of 7 days.

The main cause of the auto-destruction of the West is not Islam, it is abortion and destruction of familly values. As it is written in the Apocalypto movie (I try to remember), something in this kind: "A civilisation cannot be destroyed from without if it is not first destroyed from within".

A civilisation that kills its children "on demand of the mother", is deeply rotten from inside.

I do believe that conception (or fertilisation) is the beginning moment of human life.

QUESTION: If a woman is condamned to death, if this woman is pregnant, would not you WAIT the birth of the child before the execution of the death penalty of the mother? (However, I am against the death penalty)
So, why do you permit a woman to kill her INNOCENT child?

Posted by: Coaltaxopeuh at October 5, 2008 12:38 PM

Coaltaxopeuh:
I agree, in certain circumstances, murder or theft can be JUSTIFIED! But this does not take away that it is evil. Demonstration: if it can be JUSTIFIED, it is because it is intrinsecally EVIL!
Only evil can be JUSTIFIED! If something is good, it does not need to be JUSTIFIED.
Theft and murder are not inherently good or evil actions.

The main cause of the auto-destruction of the West is not Islam, it is abortion and destruction of familly values.
Abortion has nothing to do with the West's decline. It probably doesn't have a major effect on birth rates either. The disintegration of Western civilization has been documented ad nauseam, and family values are only a small part of it.

I do believe that conception (or fertilisation) is the beginning moment of human life.
No, it isn't.

So, why do you permit a woman to kill her INNOCENT child?
Medical reasons, for one.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at October 5, 2008 1:14 PM

Look at all the countries where birth control or family planning is non existent because of religious influences.

What do you see? Overpopulation, poverty, starvation, water shortages, pestilence, ignorance, and wars for diminishing resources.

That is not the future to look forward to.

God will provide? Ask the starving and dying millions around the world.

Posted by: pr126 at October 5, 2008 1:38 PM

I agree that this is not the place to be discussing abortion issues.
On a similar note, living in South Africa means that all landline telephone communication is a monopoly of an item called Telkom. In Cape Town many of the artisans are muslims.
One day I requested to have a fault on my line repaired. A young phone-line technician comes to my door and my two little dogs start barking at him. He asks me to put them out so that he can come in. I told him they won't hurt you, come in.
No, he says, he's a muslim and dogs are unclean he cannot be touched by a dog's nose.
I told him he can come and fix my phone problem or I'll be on to Telkom and tell them he doesn't want to do the job he is employed for. He came in and fixed the problem.
I am astounded that a pharmacist can refuse a service to a customer on religious grounds. The lunatics are running the asylum in Britain, my country of birth.

Posted by: Mohammed Bear at October 5, 2008 2:21 PM

JesusChristSupercop:

"Theft and murder are not inherently good or evil actions."

Actually, both terms carry the moral judgement of them in their definition. The word "murder" is supposed to mean "immoral killing". So your sentence should really say:

"Borrowing and killing are not inherently good or evil actions."

Posted by: DenverRodeo at October 5, 2008 2:36 PM

What it comes down to is a Muslim pharmacist exerting his power over a kafir woman, to put said woman in her place.

Nuts to his moral objections--He does these things because he knows he can! I wouldn't be surprised to hear that this isn't the only incident.

It's religious discrimination, because she's a kafir, the worst of all peoples.

It's sexism, because he's a man who has been brought up on the idea that women are "inferior".

This is a pharmacist, who, if he had his way, would condemn the woman to bearing an unwanted child, as a punishment for her "sin". Yet, last I remember, it took two to conceive.

Well, I guess some of you will be singing a different song, when you can't buy your alcoholic beverage of choice.

Posted by: Abscedere at October 5, 2008 3:30 PM

This thread is largely off topic.

The issue isn't abortion.

The issue is mohammedans imposing their standards on westerners in whose country they live.

Stay with me for a minute here ...

There was a story told by P. J. O'Rourke about cops observing some drug dealers strutting around in the streets they claimed as their own turf. They commented, I paraphrase, "air should be illegal if those guys breath it".

Or to look at it from another way, Rudi Giulliani's top cop reversed the policy of the NY police department of decades and sent them aggressively after minor infractions of the law. The policy was almost universally condemned by the public. And lo and behold, after a few months the general crime rate, especially for major crimes, murder, armed robbery, etc... declined significantly.

Why? Because crime is caused by criminals. Catch criminals and crime will decline. You may not catch your criminal in the act of murder, but it's pretty easy to catch the same guy jumping a subway turnstile.

Criminals habitually commit crimes. Criminals are the cause of crime.

Same principle here folks.

Sharia supremacists will offend against us in large matters and small -- in ways that enrage us and in ways that we're inclined to sympathize with (for good reasons or bad, it hardly matters).

The issue is SHARIA SUPREMACISM not abortion.

We need to stay focused.

Posted by: joeblough at October 5, 2008 3:38 PM

The morning after pill is legal here in the UK. To suggest that this extremist is right in imposing his views on this woman's life is ridiculous.

If you dont like the law, protest and lobby the government but dont try and impose your own personal beliefs on other people. Isnt that what we're fighting against??

Posted by: MrTommyAtkins at October 5, 2008 3:44 PM

Amazing.
There's an "ethical" code behind this. Interesting use of the word ethical there.
Of course the code is designed so that asians, mostly Muslim asians have the right to not do their job properly after training at the public's expense.
Bet a white pharmacist couldn't refuse drugs to an asian man because he doesn't like misogynistic cultures; he'd be struck off before you could say "double standards"
Sickening, really really fucking sickening.

Posted by: Ian at October 5, 2008 4:00 PM

I'm sorry to burst the bubbles of the pro-aborts, but it is a self-evident biological truism that the life of any mammal (and most other animals) begins at conception, where we have a living being with its own unique DNA, chromosomes, etc.

A human conceptus is a human life. Period. There is simply no debate about this. What you all mean to say is that this particular human life, the conceptus, is not a PERSON. But of course this is a personal religious/philosophical belie that has nothing in the way of science or sound logic to back it up.

It's actually the "pro-choice" crowd that arbitrarily imposes a distinction between human life and personhood, thereby imposing their personal religious/philosophical beliefs on others, in particular the person being killed.

Posted by: DominvsVobiscvm at October 5, 2008 4:02 PM

I agree with Joeblough. "The issue isn't abortion. It is Shariah supremacism." I hope we never see the day when we can't buy ANYTHING in a pharmacy because we don't have our hair, faces, or bodies completely covered.

Posted by: charlie at October 5, 2008 5:43 PM

Dear Ruth Johnson: Welcome to the Law of Sharia / you had a few strikes against you going into the store: you are a woman - you are not muslim - your womb is already preoccupied - you are british - you are trying to think like a Brit when speaking to a muslim. Good luck in the future with dealing with the pill pushers. Just think of the mess will be when a surgeon refuses to save you life for the reasons listed above. Rock On.

Posted by: 60s-rebel at October 5, 2008 6:52 PM