Another Moral Dilemma For You To Feast On

[Zoice]

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.

Honestly, what the fuck are you on about? Are you one of those guys that shoves a camera into a courtroom, saying that you don't recognize the government or some shit like that, then acts surprised when you're tasered? For the hopefully but not realistically last time, the right to run any kind of business however you want does not exist.

Access to contraception, on the other hand, is a human right.

Again, that does not apply.

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

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.

*Eyeroll*

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

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

*Eyes fall out and roll on the floor*

[Zoice]

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.

And as I already said earlier, that ought to be changed.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

There's no need to pretend.



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.

Honestly, what the fuck are you on about? Are you one of those guys that shoves a camera into a courtroom, saying that you don't recognize the government or some shit like that, then acts surprised when you're tasered? For the hopefully but not realistically last time, the right to run any kind of business however you want does not exist.

Access to contraception, on the other hand, is a human right.

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



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.

*Eyeroll*

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

*Eyes fall out and roll on the floor*

And, as I have pointed out several times now: there is NO right to the time/effort/labor of others. I'm not sure what you're not getting about that.

I DO notice the fact that you still are not providing me with what you claim is my right to demand.

[Zoice]

Honestly, what the fuck are you on about? Are you one of those guys that shoves a camera into a courtroom, saying that you don't recognize the government or some shit like that, then acts surprised when you're tasered? For the hopefully but not realistically last time, the right to run any kind of business however you want does not exist.

Access to contraception, on the other hand, is a human right.



*Eyeroll*



*Eyes fall out and roll on the floor*

And, as I have pointed out several times now: there is NO right to the time/effort/labor of others. I'm not sure what you're not getting about that.

I DO notice the fact that you still are not providing me with what you claim is my right to demand.

I've noticed the fact that you still can't understand the difference between slavery and regulating healthcare businesses. It's a pretty fucking simple distinction, you have to work hard to let it fly over your head. Good work.

[Fartsniffage]

That's an answer without actually answering the question. I'll rephrase to avoid misunderstanding.

Given that both doctors and pharmacists are integral in promoting the health and wellbeing of a society, why do you think that one should have different requirements when it comes to the provision of their services based on their personal beliefs?

Well firstly, I've never made the argument that there should be a difference between doctors and pharmacists in terms of requirements for provision of services.

Secondly, I've spent most of the time in this thread either clarifying what is actually happening, because most people don't seem to understand how the New Zealand system works, or that she is somehow refusing to stock/deny the sale of contraceptives when this isn't true. There are a lot of people who seem to be under the impression that refusing to sell a product over the counter is basically the same as denial of service.

Okay. So what is your opinion on this matter? Should the pharmacist be able to put their beliefs before their patients?

[Costa Fierro]

Okay. So what is your opinion on this matter? Should the pharmacist be able to put their beliefs before their patients?

No, to put it simply.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

And, as I have pointed out several times now: there is NO right to the time/effort/labor of others. I'm not sure what you're not getting about that.

I DO notice the fact that you still are not providing me with what you claim is my right to demand.

I've noticed the fact that you still can't understand the difference between slavery and regulating healthcare businesses. It's a pretty fucking simple distinction, you have to work hard to let it fly over your head. Good work.

So you don't even know the meaning of the word 'fact'. How embarrassing for you.

When you're done displaying your lack of understanding of the words you use, let me know and we can get back to the issue at hand

[Des-Bal]

No, to put it simply.

Why? This is a person declining to take an optional course, religious belief doesn't even enter into it.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

No, to put it simply.

Why? This is a person declining to take an optional course, religious belief doesn't even enter into it.

It sorta does because in the very OP she's saying why she doesn't want to take the course. It goes against her morals.

To be eligible to sell the emergency contraceptive pill, commonly referred to as the morning-after pill, pharmacists have to complete a course.

Owner Elsa Norvil says she will not do this, for personal reasons.

"There are alternatives in place and it is an ethical right whether or not one chooses to stock or dispense the emergency contraceptive pill," she said.

"I am not prepared to supply the pill over the counter, as I see conception as a potential life, with a soul, so I will not sell it as I consider this as ending another's life.

[Des-Bal]

It sorta does because in the very OP she's saying why she doesn't want to take the course. It goes against her morals.

No, it doesn't because she isn't seeking any kind of religious exemption. The thing she doesn't want to do isn't a required thing. Whether you don't want to buy a dog for religious reasons or just because you don't like dogs is irrelevant when nobody is forcing you to buy a dog.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It sorta does because in the very OP she's saying why she doesn't want to take the course. It goes against her morals.

No, it doesn't because she isn't seeking any kind of religious exemption. The thing she doesn't want to do isn't a required thing. Whether you don't want to buy a dog for religious reasons or just because you don't like dogs is irrelevant when nobody is forcing you to buy a dog.

The reason she isn't taking the course is because, and she said it, it goes against her morals. She's forcing people to go see a doctor when the morning after-pill can very easily be sold OTC. A medication, I may add, that has a narrow window opportunity to work. Not everyone will be able to get a prescription in the allotted time. So she is indeed having her morals dictate how she's going to do her job and how others will get the morning-after pill.

[Des-Bal]

The reason she isn't taking the course is because, and she said it, it goes against her morals. She's forcing people to go see a doctor when the morning after-pill can very easily be sold OTC. A medication, I may add, that has a narrow window opportunity to work. Not everyone will be able to get a prescription in the allotted time. So she is indeed having her morals dictate how she's going to do her job and how others will get the morning-after pill.

It doesn't matter that her reason is her morals. If she didn't want to take the class because she was concerned it would interfere with watching soap operas that would be perfectly valid. This is a medication which has no utility for 50% of the population and to the remaining 50% is only necessary over the counter in the event that one or more forms of birth control either fail or are not used and the person in need of it is unable to quickly gain access to a prescription. It's a narrow category that does not justify forcing this person to sell over the counter.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Her bullshit beliefs should not interfere with the rights of others. One's freedom ends where another's begins.

If I refused to grill a steak at work because I was opposed to eating beef, I'd get fucking fired.

[Des-Bal]

Her bullshit beliefs should not interfere with the rights of others. One's freedom ends where another's begins.

If I refused to grill a steak at work because I was opposed to eating beef, I'd get fucking fired.

This isn't a chef refusing to cook a steak it's a restaurant owner refusing to put steak on the menu. It's not even that, it's an owner refusing to serve steak under certain circumstances. Your freedom ends where another's begins, that's why you can't force another person to do your bidding.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

This isn't a chef refusing to cook a steak it's a restaurant owner refusing to put steak on the menu. It's not even that, it's an owner refusing to serve steak under certain circumstances. Your freedom ends where another's begins, that's why you can't force another person to do your bidding.

If this steak is the only food that can guarantee people basic bodily sovereignty, and there's only one restaurant in town, that restaurant should be obligated to provide said steak, just like every other restaurant in the country does. The freedom of the people should come before the preferences of the capitalist.

[Des-Bal]

If this steak is the only food that can guarantee people basic bodily sovereignty, and there's only one restaurant in town, that restaurant should be obligated to provide said steak, just like every other restaurant in the country does. The freedom of the people should come before the preferences of the capitalist.

Not it absolutely shouldn't because this is a capitalist enterprise. If you want to spin that bullshit about the pharmacist owing anybody anything ten make "Pharmacist" a government job. This is a private citizen who took upon themselves all the risks of starting and managing a business. If the morning after pill is a basic human right then require the government to provide them not private citizens.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Not it absolutely shouldn't because this is a capitalist enterprise.

Yes it absolutely should, because, once again: The freedom of the people should come before the preferences of the capitalist.

If you want to spin that bullshit about the pharmacist owing anybody anything

That capitalist owes a lot more than what people are asking for. Their entire practice is built on exploitation and theft.

..ten make "Pharmacist" a government job. This is a private citizen who took upon themselves all the risks of starting and managing a business. If the morning after pill is a basic human right then require the government to provide them not private citizens.

I don't give a flying shit about any "risks" a capitalist takes. You can take risks to do fucked-up things. Doesn't make the thing less fucked up.

[Des-Bal]

Yes it absolutely should, because, once again: The freedom of the people should come before the preferences of the capitalist.

That capitalist owes a lot more than what people are asking for. Their entire practice is built on exploitation and theft.

I don't give a flying shit about any "risks" a capitalist takes. You can take risks to do fucked-up things. Doesn't make the thing less fucked up.

And there's the issue. This is a pile of collectivist shit predicated on opposition to capitalism and the rights of the individual. When the government is running the clinic then the government should feel free to say "you must provide these pills over the counter." Until they put all the legwork in they can fuck right off.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Yes it absolutely should, because, once again: The freedom of the people should come before the preferences of the capitalist.

That capitalist owes a lot more than what people are asking for. Their entire practice is built on exploitation and theft.

I don't give a flying shit about any "risks" a capitalist takes. You can take risks to do fucked-up things. Doesn't make the thing less fucked up.

And there's the issue. This is a pile of collectivist shit predicated on opposition to capitalism and the rights of the individual. When the government is running the clinic then the government should feel free to say "you must provide these pills over the counter." Until they put all the legwork in they can fuck right off.

I am literally the guy here advocating for freedom and rights to their furthest extent.

Capitalists denying people medication is not freedom, because it infringes on the rights of said people. This is literally equivalent to asserting people have the "right" to own slaves, and that barring people from owning slaves is in opposition to the "rights of the individual."

i am the one who supports individual freedom. Not you. I don't give a fuck about any "legwork" capitalists put into their exploitation. SS soldiers put in a lot of hours too, rounding up dissidents and digging mass graves.

[Costa Fierro]

Capitalists denying people medication is not freedom, because it infringes on the rights of said people.

Nothing is being denied. I can't remember how many times I've mentioned this so far in this thread.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

Her bullshit beliefs should not interfere with the rights of others.

And in this case, it isn't.

If I refused to grill a steak at work because I was opposed to eating beef, I'd get fucking fired.

That's your employer's decision and rightfully so. In this case, as the boss, it is rightfully her decision.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

And there's the issue. This is a pile of collectivist shit predicated on opposition to capitalism and the rights of the individual. When the government is running the clinic then the government should feel free to say "you must provide these pills over the counter." Until they put all the legwork in they can fuck right off.

I am literally the guy here advocating for freedom and rights to their furthest extent.

Capitalists denying people medication is not freedom, because it infringes on the rights of said people. This is literally equivalent to asserting people have the "right" to own slaves, and that barring people from owning slaves is in opposition to the "rights of the individual."

i am the one who supports individual freedom. Not you. I don't give a fuck about any "legwork" capitalists put into their exploitation. SS soldiers put in a lot of hours too, rounding up dissidents and digging mass graves.

No, you are the guy here advocating for placing your desire above the rights of this woman.

There is no such thing as a right to the time/effort/labor of other people.

Your hatred of capitalism does not give you any justification for subordinating others

[Zoice]

I've noticed the fact that you still can't understand the difference between slavery and regulating healthcare businesses. It's a pretty fucking simple distinction, you have to work hard to let it fly over your head. Good work.

So you don't even know the meaning of the word 'fact'. How embarrassing for you.

When you're done displaying your lack of understanding of the words you use, let me know and we can get back to the issue at hand

I explained very clearly how you are abusing the words hypocrisy and slavery. Your response was "nuh uh!".

I am literally the guy here advocating for freedom and rights to their furthest extent.

Capitalists denying people medication is not freedom, because it infringes on the rights of said people. This is literally equivalent to asserting people have the "right" to own slaves, and that barring people from owning slaves is in opposition to the "rights of the individual."

i am the one who supports individual freedom. Not you. I don't give a fuck about any "legwork" capitalists put into their exploitation. SS soldiers put in a lot of hours too, rounding up dissidents and digging mass graves.

No, you are the guy here advocating for placing your desire above the rights of this woman.

There is no such thing as a right to the time/effort/labor of other people.

Your hatred of capitalism does not give you any justification for subordinating others

Some sectors like healthcare, national security, law enforcement, firefighting, shouldn't be done privately. It is too important that they are done effectively and equally to let it be a private unregulated system. Hence why pharmacies, hospitals, and clinics should be carefully controlled by The Man.

[Coalition of Minor Planets]

So you don't even know the meaning of the word 'fact'. How embarrassing for you.

When you're done displaying your lack of understanding of the words you use, let me know and we can get back to the issue at hand

I explained very clearly how you are abusing the words hypocrisy and slavery. Your response was "nuh uh!".

Well, since you've yet to ever come up with any real case that I was mistaken in any way, your 'nuh uh' can be easily dismissed. You even helpfully posted definitions illustrating my point.

Some sectors like healthcare, national security, law enforcement, firefighting, shouldn't be done privately. It is too important that they are done effectively and equally to let it be a private unregulated system. Hence why pharmacies, hospitals, and clinics should be carefully controlled by The Man.

And you can have as many government pharmacies, hospitals, and clinics as you desire without involving this woman in any way.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

No, you are the guy here advocating for placing your desire above the rights of this woman.

Says the guy advocating for placing the desires of the capitalist over the rights of women in the town mentioned.

There is no such thing as a right to the time/effort/labor of other people.

I fully agree. Which is why capitalism must be abolished.

Your hatred of capitalism does not give you any justification for subordinating others

Replace a couple words and this literally sounds like an anti-capitalist argument, not even shitting you.

Your love for class society does not give you any justification for subordinating the masses.