The Christian Medical Association Says: No Plan B for You, Harlot!

Christ. They’re at it again.

Pharmacists in Washington State have gone to court to affirm their right to make moral judgments about clients and deny Plan B contraception. 

It’s not like I haven’t discussed this before

In a way, I don’t want to write about this one more time. I just want to end the way I did last time: get the fuck out of my uterus.

But, that isn’t going to work. 

Stormans v. Selecky is on its way to the Ninth District Court of Appeals, which means, yep, it’s on its way to the Supreme Court. Regardless of who wins the case, it’ll be appealed. 

At issue is this. The pharmacists and Ralph’s Thriftway pharmacy have decided that Plan B contraception is really an abortifacient. Even though scientific evidence does not support their contention. It is possible that it prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall, but you are not pregnant unless and until said egg implants.  It’s also equally true that it may prevent a woman from ovulating. Plan B, or the Morning After Pill (despite “The Walking Dead’s” STUPID confusion of it with RU-486) is NOT the abortion pill. 

It’s the pill that stands between a rapist impregnating his victim. Or a woman whose method of birth control failed (condoms break, diaphragms come out) from having to get an abortion should she end up with an unwanted pregnancy. 

But really, this is besides the point. 

I’m sorry. You’re a pharmacist. 

You are not the moral arbiter of who gets to take what drug. 

I mean, gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins: is it against Christian ethics for a pharmacist to fill a prescription for Type II diabetes drugs for a morbidly obese person?

And why does a 75-year old man need Viagra? He shouldn’t be making babies at his age anyway. And, according to certain Christian precepts, you should not be having sex unless you’re planning to make babies.

So, why is it that the only thing that the Christian Medical Association objects to is Plan B? 

Could it be because they have problems with women having sex? 

Nah. That couldn’t be it. I’m sure they celebrate sexual women.

Damn. I want to write something profound, make the point that they should recognize their hypocrisy and get on with their jobs. 

But they’re not listening. 

What was that I said before?

Get the fuck out of my uterus. 

Yep. That’s it. 

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

  • equalist

    My stance on the issue has always been this:  If a person doesn’t want to dispense birth control and emergency contraception in a pharmacy environment according to doctor’s prescription or in the case of OTC drugs according to the laws, then they have no business being in that field.  Just as any doctor wanting to work in emergency care who’s not willing to perform an abortion to save the life of a woman needs to find another field to go into.

  • crowepps

    A pharmacist with strong moral convictions could work in a nursing home, in a hospital, in a veteran’s health center, or in a large pharmacy where other pharmacists wouldn’t mind covering what he’s unwilling to deal with.  And a doctor who didn’t feel able to handle ER duties could change fields as well.  The price in inconvenience and lost income that is generated by their moral convictions should be THEIR payment to make, not imposed on strangers.

  • equalist

    Absolutely.  I get the feeling that those who claim a strong moral conviction against particular duties of their chosen field seem to me to be more attention seekers looking to punish those with different beliefs than to actually be honestly and completely dedicated to their field.  With other areas of work available, it brings up the question of why someone with these convictions would insist on pursuing a field where they’d be required to perform duties that they hold such strong beliefs against.  The only answer that makes sense is because they know that they have an “out” to avoid doing things that they may find distasteful, and if they like they can force the issue.  No other field, medical or otherwise has a built in provision to allow employees to shirk duties necessary to their profession in the name of “moral conviction”, and of all the fields where this should not be allowed, health care I would think would be the most obvious, due to the likelihood of life or death circumstance relying on the action or inaction of the workers to determine the outcome for the patient.