Christian registrar wins case against workplace bullying
The devout Christian registrar who won a landmark legal battle over her refusal to carry out gay ‘weddings’ has spoken for the first time about the devastating campaign of bullying she suffered at the hands of her politically correct colleagues.
Lillian Ladele says she was treated as a ‘pariah’ because her traditional values were at odds with the dogmatism of equalities-obsessed Islington Council.
‘This experience has shattered me,’ she said. ‘It has been so overwhelming. For more than two years of my life I was treated as though I was full of hate, which is just not me at all.
‘All I ever wanted was to have my beliefs respected, just as I try to respect the views of others, even if I don’t agree with them.’
I have such inconsistent views when it comes to things like this. Like, I don’t think a registrar should have to marry same-sex couples if they held the job before the law changed. But, on the other hand, I feel that pharmacists have an obligation to provide the morning after pill - though NOT the abortion pill, RU486. Doctors should not have to perform abortions. I guess these are still issues that I have not completely worked out for myself, in my own mind. But I’m glad this woman won her case.
The “morning after” pill works up to 72 hours after “unprotected” sexual intercourse.
Conception can occur in as little as 30 minutes.
Now is as good a time as any to work through those numbers in your own mind, for yourself.
But, on the other hand, I feel that pharmacists have an obligation to provide the morning after pill
So freedom of religion for everyone but pharmacists? And the government should tell the owners of private pharmacies how to run their businesses?
Comment by BillyHW — July 13, 2008 @ 9:16 pm
I think part of it Billy is that when you are studying pharmacology, you are well aware of the various drugs you will be expected to dispense. Viagara is a good example. Should the pharmacist-with-conscience be allowed to withhold if the patient isn’t wearing a wedding ring? How about the same regarding birth control pills? Can a modern-day pharmacist tell a fat person to eat less in order to control their diabetes, instead of dispensing insulin? What about penicillin for an STD - is that person too immoral to deserve treatment? Many of the pills and potions in existence today are made to reverse damage we do to ourselves with “immoral” behavior. I just don’t think it’s up to the pharmacist to decide.
RG
Comment by Right Girl — July 13, 2008 @ 9:25 pm
“So freedom of religion for everyone but pharmacists?”
It’s not a question of freedom of religion - it’s a question of doing your goddamn job. Should a Muslim cab driver be allowed to refuse passengers who have been drinking? Should he be allowed to refuse passengers with dogs?
What’s that, Bill? Speak up, I can’t hear you! “No”, you say? Well then, why should a pharmacist be allowed to refuse to serve you based on his or her religious beliefs?
Here’s a simple solution for ya: do your goddamn job, and keep your religion to yourself. If you REALLY have a problem with some aspect of your job, quit and find work elsewhere. Go be a priest for all I care. Nobody is forcing you to do anything which goes against your beliefs, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to allow your religious indoctrination to inconvenience me.
Comment by Alex — July 13, 2008 @ 9:59 pm
RG, how is forcing a pharmacy owner to dispense poisons (and that is the difference between the BCP/Morning After Pill vs. your other examples of genuine medicines) any different from forcing Macleans to print Muslim propaganda?
The solution to these “problems” is simple: open up your own goddamned pharmacy or start your own godamned magazine. That’s how freedom works.
Just look at the company your keeping with this one.
Comment by BillyHW — July 14, 2008 @ 3:08 am
Don’t worry Alex, there will always be plenty of convenient outlets available to you so that you can stay a child forever.
Comment by BillyHW — July 14, 2008 @ 3:31 am
[...] CHRISTIAN REGISTRAR wins case against workplace bullying …. [...]
Pingback by Steynian 198 « Free Mark Steyn! — July 14, 2008 @ 4:38 pm
RG, there is a key to working out the details of the doctor and pharmacist ethical issues, which I submit are more life-and-death than cab driver issues. The key is natural law understanding of the purpose of medicine, as embodied in the Hippocratic Oath (in its older forms) and other philosophical writings. The purpose of medicine is to restore healthy, normal functioning and preserve life. Insulin restores healthy, normal functioning in a diabetic. Even Viagra can be said to restore healthy, normal functioning in some patients. But all forms of birth control, when used for the purpose of birth control, have as their intention the subversion of healthy, normal functioning of the reproductive system. The most extreme forms of this subversion, of course, involve the actual destruction of a life. The same logic would apply to so-called “sex change” operations, where you end up with not a sex change, but a chemically and surgically mutilated man or woman. There are numerous side arguments, consequentialist arguments, objective morality arguments, etc., but I would say the top-level sort has to do with the purpose of human medicine: either it’s just another trade where you give the customer whatever he pays for, or it actually has moral responsibilities to preserve life, health, and natural functioning of body systems, digestive, reproductive, or any other.
Comment by Dave — July 15, 2008 @ 8:23 am