07-27-2007, 02:16 PM
|
 |
pixie of the wood
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,575
|
|
|
it’s kinda tricky. i can understand they're loathe to make anything available that may go against their nature and beliefs. after all, it’s not as if we require doctors to perform abortions, or practice any form of medicine for that matter; they choose their fields on their own. but i think it's a sign of the times that most doctors are open minded, normally withholding judgement and just providing treatment or a service. it wasn't always that way. they have come to be a mostly progressive lot and have sort of evolved the hippocratic oath to mean do not judge as well as do no harm. in a way, they have been policing themselves to keep pace with society’s value changes, and although a pharmacist's duties are not totally dissimilar to a medical doctor's, they haven't necessarily taken on the "public servant" role that so many doctors have, and they don’t have that ever important oath that would bully, cow or shame them into providing a wanted or needed service. if we allow arbitrary moral judgement by such a powerful branch of community for any drug (after all, the drugs they provide us can be life-saving as well as just life-improving), then we must allow it for all drugs, and i don’t think i’m willing to let joe doper at the pharm-aide down the street start deciding to withhold drugs i’m taking because he finds them or me morally reprehensible.
i feel for ya, i really do, but when it comes down to it you don't a.) have the training (or my permission) to override what a doctor has decided is good or bad for my body, or b.) the right to heave your morality onto my shoulders.
|