Nice to see O'Bama working on getting rid of midnight Bush rules

[Lissa]

Or, if they are intent on getting the pills they require, they find the doctor who will prescribe them, the pharmacy that will fill that prescription, and the insurance company that will pay for them (or pay for them out of pocket). If they are under too much mental duress, then I'm certain that most victim's counseling centers would have help available. Anecdotally, we might easily point at an example, like this one, and say "Bad pharmacy!", but pharmacies are still a business that are often owned and operated by the pharmacist, who should be able to freely decide which medicines they will stock. If a person decided to commit suicide because the 7-11 was out of stock on beef jerky, would you blame the owner of the 7-11?

Abortion is the toughest example in this moral conscience dilemma. As a society we are not entirely sure if the unborn baby is even a citizen, or when it becomes one. In the US, the electorate is split at about 50/50 on this issue. Then, for those extreme cases of rape, incest, imminent death of the mother, the question of what is the right ethical decision is akin to the 10 people in the 7 man life raft problem. For those people that believe the unborn baby also has the right of survival, expediently killing it might not be the right ethical decision.

You don't seem to understand the point. The pharmacy in question had the drug. The victim of the rape was not in their right mind due to the duress they had been put under. A Doctor had given them the perscription to be filled. The pharmacist in question refused to fulfill the perscription and then gave the victim a hard time because of they felt it was morally objectionable. The victim had every right, once in a calmed state and looking back on the situation to legally sue the pharmacy and pharmacist in question for not fulfilling the perscription or telling the victim where they could go to get the perscription fulfilled.

If you refuse to given a patient information or point them to where they could get the information because you find it morally objectionable even though it will improve the quality of life of the patient, you should not be a medical practiioneer. Your job as a medical practioneer is to improve the quality of life of your patients, if you refuse to do so because you find aspects morally objectionable, then you should go find another position where you would not be put into that moral dilemma.

Also, to speak to you analogy, you do realize that most conservative thought is that abortion is valid in the case of rape, incest, or mother's life is in jeopardy. It is only the far right fringe that believes that the child should take precidence over the mother (a very dark ages mentality). You're 10 people in 7 man raft is the epitomy of a straw man arguement in this case. You should not force someone to have to die to have a child or was forced into a situation where they became pregant against their will, and most conservative thought agrees with that stance.