] Herr, 33, of Denton, said he declined to fill the
] prescription for the so-called "morning-after pill"
] because he believes it could have killed the embryo if
] the woman already had conceived. Though he had declined
] five or six times in the past to fill such prescriptions,
] it was the first time he had been handed one for a rape
] victim, he said.
]
]
] "I went in the back room and briefly prayed about it,"
] said Herr, who had worked for Eckerd for five years. "I
] actually called my pastor ... and asked him what he
] thought about it."

[ It's tempting to put this story into the category of religious fundamentalist moral imposition, but perhaps the issue is more complex than that.

Certainly, from a legal standpoint, the employment agreement the guy entered into forbade him from refusing to fill this prescription, fine, he should've read it and, recognizing a moral conflict, turned down the job, or negotiated for a policy change.

That being said, if you're a person who believes that abortion (even this form) is murder, it would seem that you have a moral obligation to refuse to perform a job task that will result in one, even if it may cost you your job. I may think it's wrongheaded and foolish, but at least it's consistent.

What bothers me more is that none of the 3 pharmacists present would fill it. In this case, there was a pharmacy down the block who was willing to fill the prescription... what if there was only one pharmacy in town? I suspect that this sort of thing is more common than we know...
-k]

CNN.com - Pharmacists fired for denying 'morning after' pill - Feb. 12, 2004