... if it is glaringly obvious to you that both sides are wrong. David Boaz writes:
Strange bedfellows Sens. Rick Santorum, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Kerry have introduced a bill in Congress that would require employers to accommodate religious employees. "No American should have to face the choice between practicing their faith or working at their job. It's that simple," said Kerry.
Meanwhile, some California legislators want to require pharmacists to dispense all lawful drugs, even if they have moral objections to birth control or to "morning-after pills," which some people consider a form of abortion.
What happens if Congress passes the Workplace Religious Freedom Act and California passes a law requiring pharmacists to fill prescriptions? In that case, a California pharmacist would apparently have both a right to exercise his moral beliefs in doing his job and a legal obligation to fill prescriptions even if they violate his conscience. So which is it? Does he get punished for not giving out the prescription, or do his employers get punished if they require him to fill the prescription to keep his job?
James Leroy Wilson's one-man magazine.
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment