Another Moral Dilemma For You To Feast On

[Zoice]

It isn't like denial of service, it's more analogous to waiting periods before abortion procedures. It isn't denying service, it's just putting more and more barriers in the way of women's reproductive rights, and because of those barriers, some people are going to be hurt.

There aren't any barriers as I have already explained. Do you actually read what I post?

The barrier is the prescription for an emergency prescription.

[Costa Fierro]

You've made yourself very clear. I know that she's giving them out to people with a prescription. The fact that she isn't giving them out OTC is the problem I have here.

And why is OTC better than prescription, given that said contraceptives are not covered by government subsidies if they are sold OTC? There aren't any barriers to this, because doctors in New Zealand are obligated to provide prescriptions regardless of personal views as per established guidelines set by a government body, i.e they're legally obligated to provide prescriptions for contraceptives.

[Costa Fierro]

There aren't any barriers as I have already explained. Do you actually read what I post?

The barrier is the prescription for an emergency prescription.

Which can be obtained at any time.

[Zoice]

You've made yourself very clear. I know that she's giving them out to people with a prescription. The fact that she isn't giving them out OTC is the problem I have here.

And why is OTC better than prescription, given that said contraceptives are not covered by government subsidies if they are sold OTC? There aren't any barriers to this, because doctors in New Zealand are obligated to provide prescriptions regardless of personal views as per established guidelines set by a government body, i.e they're legally obligated to provide prescriptions for contraceptives.

I want the OTC to subsidied as well.

The barrier is the prescription for an emergency prescription.

Which can be obtained at any time.

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic. Removing the prescription requirement doesn't cause any harm, but it being there can be a complication for some women.

[Costa Fierro]

I want the OTC to subsidied as well.

One pharmacy in a largely rural district isn't going to change how the government funds prescription or over the counter drugs. In fact most people in the town are angry that the local district health board isn't planning on building a family planning center which is not only better at dealing with sexual health but also where you can also obtain contraceptives.

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic. Removing the prescription requirement doesn't cause any harm, but it being there can be a complication for some women.

Three things. One, since when was the ability to obtain a prescription at any time of the day a "barrier"? Two, since when were contraceptives a human right? Three, I've already explained this but removing the prescription requirements can cause harm, because it means that the drug must be paid for in full. This would put prices well over NZ$40 per box, which a number of people, especially young people do not have.

[Zoice]

I want the OTC to subsidied as well.

One pharmacy in a largely rural district isn't going to change how the government funds prescription or over the counter drugs. In fact most people in the town are angry that the local district health board isn't planning on building a family planning center which is not only better at dealing with sexual health but also where you can also obtain contraceptives.

Yes, a family planning center would be great. But if the town is too small for one, then the pharmacy should pick up the slack.

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic. Removing the prescription requirement doesn't cause any harm, but it being there can be a complication for some women.

Three things. One, since when was the ability to obtain a prescription at any time of the day a "barrier"? Two, since when were contraceptives a human right? Three, I've already explained this but removing the prescription requirements can cause harm, because it means that the drug must be paid for in full. This would put prices well over NZ$40 per box, which a number of people, especially young people do not have.

1) It is a barrier if you are in an abusive relationship and you can't get a prescription safely, or if you are just too busy to make it, or you can't afford the trip to the doctor's, there are plenty of reasons why it isn't possible to get an appointment within the next day.

2) Since we realized how important the right to reproductive autonomy is.

3) Hence why I would want it to be subsidized OTC as well.

[Crockerland]

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic.

I agree completely, NZ should amend it's constitution to make sure that nonconsensual work (slave labour) can never be implemented, on pharmacists or anyone else.

[Costa Fierro]

Yes, a family planning center would be great. But if the town is too small for one, then the pharmacy should pick up the slack.

It's not too small for one (because it would serve the whole district, not just the town), it's that the DHB can't be bothered/is unable to fund it.

1) It is a barrier if you are in an abusive relationship and you can't get a prescription safely, or if you are just too busy to make it, or you can't afford the trip to the doctor's, there are plenty of reasons why it isn't possible to get an appointment within the next day.

An abusive relationship would probably limit the ability for someone to purchase OTC too. For people who are too busy, as I said, it can be obtained any time, even after the doctor's office is closed because most GP's will have an after hours service, which may not require an appointment. For affordability, depending on the GP, it might actually be cheaper to go to a doctor than to buy the drug OTC.

Hence why I would want it to be subsidized OTC as well.

Ideally.

[Zoice]

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic.

I agree completely, NZ should amend it's constitution to make sure that nonconsensual work (slave labour) can never be implemented, on pharmacists or anyone else.

Jesus Christ, stop calling slave labour whenever you get your feelings hurt because healthcare professions are held to a standard of care.

Yes, a family planning center would be great. But if the town is too small for one, then the pharmacy should pick up the slack.

It's not too small for one (because it would serve the whole district, not just the town), it's that the DHB can't be bothered/is unable to fund it.

1) It is a barrier if you are in an abusive relationship and you can't get a prescription safely, or if you are just too busy to make it, or you can't afford the trip to the doctor's, there are plenty of reasons why it isn't possible to get an appointment within the next day.

An abusive relationship would probably limit the ability for someone to purchase OTC too. For people who are too busy, as I said, it can be obtained any time, even after the doctor's office is closed because most GP's will have an after hours service, which may not require an appointment. For affordability, depending on the GP, it might actually be cheaper to go to a doctor than to buy the drug OTC.

For some people, yes, for others, no. It's a lot easier to sneak to the pharmacy if you're nearby than to have to sneak to the doctor's as well. Availability of contraception never hurt anyone.

Hence why I would want it to be subsidized OTC as well.

Ideally.

This whole discussion is about what the ideal action of the government would be.

[Costa Fierro]

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic.

I agree completely, NZ should amend it's constitution to make sure that nonconsensual work (slave labour) can never be implemented, on pharmacists or anyone else.

New Zealand doesn't have a constitution...

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

And yet you refuse to do so. That's called hypocrisy

I think that politicians should not be bribed. The fact that I myself am not a politician is not hypocritical.

I think that policemen should not escalate situations and shoot people when they don't have to. The fact that I'm not a policeman is not hypocritical.

And I think that doctors and pharmacists should be helping people, not making religious moral decisions that can harm them. The fact that I'm not a pharmacist is not hypocritical.

None of which is related to my statements.

You think other people should have to do something that you refuse to do. That IS hypocritical

[Crockerland]

I agree completely, NZ should amend it's constitution to make sure that nonconsensual work (slave labour) can never be implemented, on pharmacists or anyone else.

Jesus Christ, stop calling slave labour whenever you get your feelings hurt because healthcare professions are held to a standard of care.

Not really a "standard of care" so much as a random medication you want to force them all to give out without a prescription.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

One pharmacy in a largely rural district isn't going to change how the government funds prescription or over the counter drugs. In fact most people in the town are angry that the local district health board isn't planning on building a family planning center which is not only better at dealing with sexual health but also where you can also obtain contraceptives.

Yes, a family planning center would be great. But if the town is too small for one, then the pharmacy should pick up the slack.

Three things. One, since when was the ability to obtain a prescription at any time of the day a "barrier"? Two, since when were contraceptives a human right? Three, I've already explained this but removing the prescription requirements can cause harm, because it means that the drug must be paid for in full. This would put prices well over NZ$40 per box, which a number of people, especially young people do not have.

1) It is a barrier if you are in an abusive relationship and you can't get a prescription safely, or if you are just too busy to make it, or you can't afford the trip to the doctor's, there are plenty of reasons why it isn't possible to get an appointment within the next day.

2) Since we realized how important the right to reproductive autonomy is.

3) Hence why I would want it to be subsidized OTC as well.

The right to ALL personal autonomy....the only part of which is involved in the case at hand being that of the pharmacist....which is something you have made abundantly clear you do NOT view as particularly important. You rank it below your desire

[Zoice]

I think that politicians should not be bribed. The fact that I myself am not a politician is not hypocritical.

I think that policemen should not escalate situations and shoot people when they don't have to. The fact that I'm not a policeman is not hypocritical.

And I think that doctors and pharmacists should be helping people, not making religious moral decisions that can harm them. The fact that I'm not a pharmacist is not hypocritical.

None of which is related to my statements.

You think other people should have to do something that you refuse to do. That IS hypocritical

I'm not a pharmacist. The statements I gave were examples of how you misuse the word hypocrisy. If I were a pharmacist and I didn't give the drug OTC, that's hypocrisy. But I'm not a pharmacist, nor am I a hypocrite.

Yes, a family planning center would be great. But if the town is too small for one, then the pharmacy should pick up the slack.



1) It is a barrier if you are in an abusive relationship and you can't get a prescription safely, or if you are just too busy to make it, or you can't afford the trip to the doctor's, there are plenty of reasons why it isn't possible to get an appointment within the next day.

2) Since we realized how important the right to reproductive autonomy is.

3) Hence why I would want it to be subsidized OTC as well.

The right to ALL personal autonomy....the only part of which is involved in the case at hand being that of the pharmacist....which is something you have made abundantly clear you do NOT view as particularly important. You rank it below your desire

The right to run whatever business you want however you want does not exist. The right to contraception does. That should be the end of debate.

Jesus Christ, stop calling slave labour whenever you get your feelings hurt because healthcare professions are held to a standard of care.

Not really a "standard of care" so much as a random medication you want to force them all to give out without a prescription.

Contraception is hardly a random medication, you're minimizing how important availability is. And yes, keeping it available to a standard of availability is a standard of care.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

I'm not a pharmacist. The statements I gave were examples of how you misuse the word hypocrisy. If I were a pharmacist and I didn't give the drug OTC, that's hypocrisy. But I'm not a pharmacist, nor am I a hypocrite.

That is dishonest. The statements you gave were not based on any statements I ever made. You are undeniably a hypocrite. You have stated that people have a right to be given medication and should be given that medication....then you turn around and refuse to provide it.

The right to run whatever business you want however you want does not exist. The right to contraception does. That should be the end of debate.

Why end the debate with a falsehood? You have NO right to the time/effort/services of other people. They are not your slaves.

[Tmutarakhan]

Nope, we've been over this: your desire for people to behave in a certain manner does not trump their right to decide for themselves./quote]
Her choice is that she can do the job of a pharmacist, or not. She has chosen not to. Somebody else will.

She has chosen to do her job. If people want someone else, then someone can come in and do a different job.

No, she has refused to do the job. You don't get to pick and choose which part of your job duties you accept. Do them all, or quit.

[Zoice]

I'm not a pharmacist. The statements I gave were examples of how you misuse the word hypocrisy. If I were a pharmacist and I didn't give the drug OTC, that's hypocrisy. But I'm not a pharmacist, nor am I a hypocrite.

That is dishonest. The statements you gave were not based on any statements I ever made. You are undeniably a hypocrite. You have stated that people have a right to be given medication and should be given that medication....then you turn around and refuse to provide it.

Bbbbuuuulllllsssshhhiiiiittttt.

Saying that people who want to be pharmacists should do it to a certain standard isn't the same as commanding a random person to be a pharmacist (that would be slavery), and the fact that I'm not a pharmacist isn't a sign of hypocrisy. You don't know what hypocrisy means, or slavery.

The right to run whatever business you want however you want does not exist. The right to contraception does. That should be the end of debate.

Why end the debate with a falsehood? You have NO right to the time/effort/services of other people. They are not your slaves.

For fuck's sake, not the slavery bullshit. Standard. Of. Fucking. Care.

Your libertarian bullshit doesn't fly when it comes to the healthcare sector.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

She has chosen to do her job. If people want someone else, then someone can come in and do a different job.

No, she has refused to do the job. You don't get to pick and choose which part of your job duties you accept. Do them all, or quit.

So you didn't bother to read it. She IS fulfilling the duties in her job description.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

Bbbbuuuulllllsssshhhiiiiittttt.

I've noticed you're fond of saying that when you cannot come up with any real objection.

Saying that people who want to be pharmacists should do it to a certain standard isn't the same as commanding a random person to be a pharmacist (that would be slavery), and the fact that I'm not a pharmacist isn't a sign of hypocrisy. You don't know what hypocrisy means, or slavery.

You aren't saying someone should do it to a certain standard. You are saying that they should have to do something. I notice the fact that you don't quite grasp the concepts of hypocrisy and slavery.

For fuck's sake, not the slavery bullshit. Standard. Of. Fucking. Care.

You're the one who came up with the notion that others are rightfully yours to command as if you're their master.

Your libertarian bullshit doesn't fly when it comes to the healthcare sector.

Your authoritarian bullshit never flies.

[Tmutarakhan]

And is an additional barrier to a human right that can be problematic.

I agree completely, NZ should amend it's constitution to make sure that nonconsensual work (slave labour) can never be implemented, on pharmacists or anyone else.

I hate to tell you this, but ANY job you take, for the rest of your life, is going to involve you being told to do things you don't really like doing it. You have the choice of doing the job, or not.

[Des-Bal]

I hate to tell you this, but ANY job you take, for the rest of your life, is going to involve you being told to do things you don't really like doing it. You have the choice of doing the job, or not.

By your fucking boss. This is not about doing or not doing your job it is about whether or not the government should foist upon you a new duty in the name of a very limited public need. The private sector is not and should not be an arm of the government. If people have a fundamental right to these pills they're taking it up with the wrong fucking person.

[Costa Fierro]

She has chosen to do her job. If people want someone else, then someone can come in and do a different job.

No, she has refused to do the job. You don't get to pick and choose which part of your job duties you accept. Do them all, or quit.

Except in this case, she can. Because pharmacists in New Zealand can choose which drugs they can sell over the counter and which drugs remain prescription only.

[Zoice]

Bbbbuuuulllllsssshhhiiiiittttt.

I've noticed you're fond of saying that when you cannot come up with any real objection.

I am quite fond of calling bullshit on bullshit, but don't pretend that I don't have a real objection.

Saying that people who want to be pharmacists should do it to a certain standard isn't the same as commanding a random person to be a pharmacist (that would be slavery), and the fact that I'm not a pharmacist isn't a sign of hypocrisy. You don't know what hypocrisy means, or slavery.

You aren't saying someone should do it to a certain standard. You are saying that they should have to do something. I notice the fact that you don't quite grasp the concepts of hypocrisy and slavery.

Slavery is defined variously as: the state or condition of being a slave; a civil relationship whereby one person has absolute power over another and controls his life, liberty, and fortune.

No, that doesn't apply here. No one has absolute power over anyone, the state is simply regulating her business to ensure that women everywhere get their right to healthcare.

the subjection of a person to another person, esp in being forced into work

No again. She is not being forced into work, any more than a worker is forced by their boss into work. She can always step back, there is no force.

severe toil; drudgery.

No, that's not what's going on here. This woman became a pharmacist of her own free will, and continues to do so of her own volition. The only thing I'm saying is that the government should extend already existing regulations on her business to include the stipulation that she offers the drug over the counter.

As for hypocrisy; the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Again, that does not apply. If I were a pharmacist and I also refused to give out the drug over the counter, while at the same time I said that she should have to do it, then I would be a hypocrite. Alternatively if I said that a random person should be forced to drop their career and become a pharmacist, while I myself wasn't willing to do that, then I would be a hypocrite. But that's not the case, and you're being incredibly over dramatic with your accusations of hypocrisy and slavery.

For fuck's sake, not the slavery bullshit. Standard. Of. Fucking. Care.

You're the one who came up with the notion that others are rightfully yours to command as if you're their master.

Stop being such a drama queen. The state regulates businesses, healthcare institutions especially. That's a good thing.

Your libertarian bullshit doesn't fly when it comes to the healthcare sector.

Your authoritarian bullshit never flies.

"Help help I'm being oppressed - they're forcing me to dispense birth control!"

I hate to tell you this, but ANY job you take, for the rest of your life, is going to involve you being told to do things you don't really like doing it. You have the choice of doing the job, or not.

By your fucking boss. This is not about doing or not doing your job it is about whether or not the government should foist upon you a new duty in the name of a very limited public need. The private sector is not and should not be an arm of the government. If people have a fundamental right to these pills they're taking it up with the wrong fucking person.

Very limited? Again, you don't understand how birth control works. The healthcare sector absolutely needs to be an arm of the government, or at the very least, extremely heavily regulated. There is no right to manage your hospital or pharmacy however you want without intervention from the government.

No, she has refused to do the job. You don't get to pick and choose which part of your job duties you accept. Do them all, or quit.

Except in this case, she can. Because pharmacists in New Zealand can choose which drugs they can sell over the counter and which drugs remain prescription only.

Could be the case, but that should be changed so that she has to give it out over the counter.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

I am quite fond of calling bullshit on bullshit, but don't pretend that I don't have a real objection.

There's no need to pretend.

No, that doesn't apply here. No one has absolute power over anyone, the state is simply regulating her business to ensure that women everywhere get their right to healthcare.

Obviously incorrect. You have stated the desire that she be "forced" to do it. The issue at hand has nothing to do with the rights of anyone else. There's no such thing as a right to the time/effort/labor of another person.

If you continue to mistakenly persist in thinking it is a right, then give me two doses of this medication. You're still violating my rights by not giving them to me after my earlier request.

Again, that does not apply.

Except for the fact that I've already shown exactly how it does apply.

Stop being such a drama queen. The state regulates businesses, healthcare institutions especially. That's a good thing.

So, being unable to make a real case, you whine about 'drama queens'. Forcing other people to work against their will is NOT a good thing...and that is exactly the type of regulation you are desiring.

"Help help I'm being oppressed - they're forcing me to dispense birth control!"

That would be correct. There's no denying that.

[Costa Fierro]

Could be the case, but that should be changed so that she has to give it out over the counter.

And as I've said, do that and it's no longer free.