The Gazette reports on a recent court decision which denied a lawsuit from an extremist pharmacist who lost his job after refusing to do his job:
U.S. District Judge John Shabaz dismissed a lawsuit brought by Neil Noesen, who claimed he was fired last summer at a Wal-Mart store in Onalaska out of religious discrimination. ... Shabaz said Wal-Mart and Medical Staffing Network accommodated Noesen’s religious opposition to contraception by having other pharmacists fill prescriptions. But he said Noesen went too far by putting customers who called about birth control on hold indefinitely and refusing to get service for those who showed up in person without notifying other pharmacists. [emphasis added]
Noesen’s actions may have been extreme, but they are also completely consistent with the ideology being promoted by those advocating “conscience clauses” for pharmacists. The basic principle is that pharmacists shouldn’t have to assist customers who are doing something thought to be immoral. Obviously pharmacists aren’t directly administering the medication, they are just handing it over — but that’s considered enough to violate one’s conscience.
Well, why can’t the same be said for handing the customer over to another pharmacist? The ideological position here already validates the principle that a person violates their conscience not just when they do something immoral, but also when they facilitate someone else doing something immoral. If anding over birth control medication qualifies as “facilitating an immoral act,” so should referring someone to another pharmacist.
Imagine if this principle were adopted more broadly: not only would someone be able to refuse military service on account of their belief that killing is immoral, but they could also refuse to do any alternative service that might be regarded as “facilitating” killing done in the military. Not only would a chef be able to refuse to cook a dish with meat in it on account of their belief that eating meat is immoral, but a waiter could refuse to pass along an order for a meat dish to the kitchen because that would qualify as “facilitating” an immoral act.
This isn’t the first time Noesen has had trouble as a pharmacist, though:
The state Pharmacy Examining Board sanctioned Noesen last year after he refused to fill a contraceptive prescription or transfer it to another pharmacy while he was a temporary pharmacist at a Menomonie Kmart in 2002. The board reprimanded him and forced him to attend ethics classes, saying he could not stand in the way of the woman’s care.
The case prompted Republican lawmakers to introduce a bill prohibiting state regulators from punishing pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control but the plan failed to win approval in either chamber.
It’s amazing, but not really surprising, that Republicans wanted to prevent state regulators from protecting women’s access to basic medical care. It was immoral for Noesen to try to prevent women from obtaining medication prescribed by their physicians, but it was just as immoral for Republican lawmakers to try to support such acts.
Noesen, it should be noted, had to be dragged out of Wal-Mart by police because he refused to leave when his supervisors dismissed him for failing to do his job. He represented himself, which says a lot about either his arrogance or his intelligence — I’m not sure which.
Christian Right Issues & Agenda:
Incredible. Next we’ll have doctors refusing to operate on patients of different faiths or something.
Mr. Noeson and his fellow nutcases should be certified, not given certificates.
If they don’t want to use birth control, that’s fair enough, that’s their own business, I don’t even want to know about it.
What I chose to do is completely my business – no explanations or reasons offered – I don’t want these lot nosing into it, period.
‘Religious Freedom’ is not the freedom to invade my privacy, and foist your retrograde opinions on me.
I’m glad Walmart fired him rather than caving in to religious or political pressure and accomodating him. He was clearly not doing his job and Walmart was right to fire him.
When my sister was a kid, she wanted to be a veterinarian but later decided against it because the job might involve putting animals down. Noesen should’ve made a similar decision; he had to have known that as a pharmacist he would be required to dispense birth control pills. People should not take jobs that they’re unwilling to fulfill the responsibilities and duties of.