YouTube You Choose Question 1

[seximamma1222]

Im WASHINGTON? so he wanted every woman who needs plan b to travel to washing to to get it? with only 72 hour time frame?

[liberalboss]

What's ridiculous is that so many people don't want to take responsibility for there own actions. Use a condemn or a actual pill that prevents contraception. Plan B is a form of abortion, in the minds of some pharmicists. If that's a pharmacist's stance on the issue, why should they be told to contradict their own beliefs?

[rainchiId]

This is ridiculous. He doesn't believe women should get abortions, yet he also opposes women having the best access to Plan B - which would be a way to PREVENT abortion. So stop trying to belittle plan be into something as meaningless as a sports drink. Plan B could be the difference keeping a woman from having an unwanted child or abortion.

[Vidkid60]

I totally agree. Just because someone doesn't want to sell something doesn't mean they should. People are not stupid it's not like oh darn It's not at this store guess I'll just have to give up. No one is going to do that they are going to search until they find it.

[tHeBuShDoKtrin]

Dino's a dinosaur!

[CorruptBarbies]

If stupidity is a virtue, Dino Rossi deserves to win.

[Nexxion]

If you are getting birth control, you should know if your pharmacy has it or sells it. If not, go to a different pharmacy. Simple as that. If you go to a restaurant that doesn't have Pepsi, you don't demand they get you it. If you want Pepsi, then you go somewhere else.

[KHallesy]

Rossi needs to be elected and needs to help stop illegal immigration in Washington State. We have become a sanctuary state even though most people who live here want illegals sent home. So far all the politicians are afraid to tackle this issue but it is time. It has nothing to do with race because I do not care where they come from. It has to do with our standard of living. Did you know illegals very seldom pay for medical coverage. They just go to the emergency room. And free babies!!!!

[ruthven78]

Rossi is right, less government telling private businesses what they can/cant do....every smoker should be able to back that one up if they were against the smoking ban

[dicktuck2]

Rossi is a tool. They should sell him at Home Depot.

[justforfun613]

Good answer Mr. Rossi. We have enough government in our lives, especially in this state.

[diane9111]

A pharmacist should not be allowed to withhold a medicine that has been prescribed by my doctor. Every American should be allowed access to legal medical treatment.

[SaxyTenshi]

Agreed!

[pudgenet]

"A pharmacist should not be allowed to withhold a medicine that has been prescribed by my doctor."

In a free country, a pharmacist must be allowed to do precisely that.

"Every American should be allowed access to legal medical treatment."

Agreed. However, no American should be required to provide that access. The fundamental nature of liberty: your right to acquire does not create an obligation for me to provide. Anything less is simply antithetical to freedom.

[SaxyTenshi]

And this is the guy who wants to outlaw birth control as well as pro-choice legislature? He doesn't need to agree with it, but it's important that government leave it a free choice for individuals to decide. Don't force your personal beliefs on us, Rossi!

[pudgenet]

Um, YOU are the one saying YOUR belief should be FORCED on the pharmacists! How can you not see your hypocrisy?

[SaxyTenshi]

Then they have no right to be a pharmacist, because it's the pharmacist's job to fulfill a doctor's prescription, not to deny someone a drug because a personal belief. No one is forcing the pharmacist to take birth control, so leave a personal decision of what to do with their body up to the individual, not the pharmacist.

[pudgenet]

"Then they have no right to be a pharmacist"

Spoken like a true communist.

See, in a free country, people have the right to do whatever they want to do.

"leave a personal decision of what to do with their body up to the individual"

Blatant hypocrisy, of course. The pharmacist should have the right to do what she wants to do with her body, too: including being a pharmacist, and NOT providing products they don't want to provide. Those are both things she does with her body.

[SaxyTenshi]

*lol*

[cornbreadjunkie]

Weren't you the one complaining about ad hominem attacks upthread?

I think you do irony well.

[pudgenet]

You apparently don't know what "ad hominem" means.

[cornbreadjunkie]

Spoken like a true Communist.

[pudgenet]

Like I said.

[cornbreadjunkie]

Meh. If I thought Youtube comments were worth my time, I'd continue this worthless thread.

[spineless1]

Pharmacists aren't sales men. They aren't selling you a car stereo. They are medical providers who don't have a right to provide or decline medical care on the basis of discrimination.

I bet any "pro-lifer" would have an issue with a pharmacist denying them a prescription to Viagra.

Hey, try going to a pharmacist who happens to be a Christian Scientist. Would support their right to deny you the medicine to keep you alive because they are morally opposed to medical intervention.

Nice try

[pudgenet]

"They ... don't have a right to provide or decline medical care on the basis of discrimination."

Yes they do.

"try going to a pharmacist who happens to be a Christian Scientist. Would support their right to deny you the medicine to keep you alive because they are morally opposed to medical intervention."

Of course, I would support their right, and I'd find another pharmacist.

Not all pharmacies carry the medicine we need in my family. So we find one that does.

[SaxyTenshi]

You'd support their right to deny you your life? I'll believe it when I see it.

[pudgenet]

"You'd support their right to deny you your life?"

Why would anyone be denying me life? What planet do you live on where there's only one person who can possibly supply me the drugs I need?

You are again arguing FOR my point: if there is a demand, and that pharmacy won't fill it, then it will go out of business and a new one will take its place. And doctors -- who wrote the prescription in the first place -- are always capable of procuring drugs if their patients can't get them another way.

[spineless1]

What a tool... Access to medicine and healthcare is very different than access to a ballpeen hammer. It has nothing to do with telling a business how to operate, it has to do with equality and preventing discrimination.

If a pharmacist has a problem with providing medicine because of their beliefs, then maybe they should find a new line of work.

[pudgenet]

"It has nothing to do with telling a business how to operate"

Incorrect. It has everything to do with that.

[SaxyTenshi]

And here lies the issue of contention. You believe that a pharmacy is a business, others believe that a pharmacy is an extension of a public good. Here is my argument: Shouldn't a "business" feel the desire (and even an obligation) to supply a LEGAL good that is appropriate for its industry?  (This is Business 101, for those of us who received their BA in Business Administration.) It comes right down to the health of their business! If you don't meet demand, your business dies. [Continued.]

[pudgenet]

"You believe that a pharmacy is a business, others believe that a pharmacy is an extension of a public good"

It IS a business. You believe it SHOULD NOT be, but it is.

"Shouldn't a "business" feel the desire (and even an obligation) to supply a LEGAL good that is appropriate for its industry?"

Shouldn't the business decide for itself what is appropriate?

"If you don't meet demand, your business dies."

Many businesses don't supply legal goods for ethical reasons, and do well for it.

[SaxyTenshi]

[Continued.] But then you'll tell me, "Well, you own a shop, but you don't sell guns in your shop because you feel that guns are against your personal beliefs!" And I will answer, "This is why I don't own a gun shop."

[pudgenet]

But you HAVE A RIGHT to own a gun shop that doesn't sell guns. You have every right to do that. So you are making my point for me.

[SaxyTenshi]

Oh boy...

I might be stating the obvious here but... a gun shop that doesn't sell guns IS NOT A GUN SHOP.

You're rediculous.

[pudgenet]

"I might be stating the obvious here but... a gun shop that doesn't sell guns IS NOT A GUN SHOP."

Not by law, no. By your own opinion only.

[MarkG45]

because its a god damn medical issue, not a "choice" issue. Doctors and medicine are for the public good, not a profit. We have laws dictating that you can not deny aid on x,y, and z, how EXACTLY does denying help to someone due to your religion not fall under that? If I were a devote Mormon, can I refuse to give medical treatment to a homosexual, or a black, or someone who is unwed? Your position opens up a flood of problems because, I can not make this clearer, we should not tolerate bigotry.

[pudgenet]

"I can not make this clearer, we should not tolerate bigotry."

I agree. We should not be bigoted and discriminate against the free choice of pharmacists.

[spineless1]

I have "free choice" where I work too... I have the right to say no to doing something, and my boss has the right to fire me on the spot.

If a "pro-life" pharmacist has a right to decline lawful work, the drug stores have a lawful right to fire them on the spot.

[pudgenet]

"If a "pro-life" pharmacist has a right to decline lawful work, the drug stores have a lawful right to fire them on the spot."

Absolutely! No one is disagreeing with this! Gregoire wants to force the DRUG STORES to ALLOW pharmacists to dispense this drug.

You're agreeing with Rossi here, not Gregoire!

[spineless1]

I guess nuance isn't your thing, but I won't fault you for that. I understand thatthings are tough for you.

What you have failed to recognize is the part where Rossi, and the other "right to refuse" folks, think that pharmacists shouldn't be allowed to be fired because of their refusal to perform the lawful work of dispensing medicine. Nor should they be held accountable because of their refusal. They want special rights against terminiation from their employment.

[pudgenet]

"I guess nuance isn't your thing"

More ad hominem. Yawn.

"What you have failed to recognize is the part where Rossi, and the other "right to refuse" folks, think that pharmacists shouldn't be allowed to be fired"

False. You're making that up.

[spineless1]

Yeah, you're totally right. I'm completely making that up.

Actually, I'm not. You are just flat wrong. This is one of the main reasons for the rule change to begin with. That was how the pharmacy laws were prior to the 2006 rule change. It was part of the Pharmacist Conscience Clause as part of WAC 246-863-095, which gave them protections from termination over their refusal to dispense pharmecuticals on the basis of religious or moral objections.

[39gop]

Actually, no, you ARE wrong. SOME people want protection from termination, but you incorrectly said that Rossi and all "right to refuse" folks want protection from termination. I've seen no evidence Rossi holds that view, and I know for sure many other "right to refuse" folks -- myself, and most of the people I talk to -- don't.

And with Rossi, his answer was all about the right of private business.

So, yes, you're wrong.

[spookynshadow]

I am asking why it is taking so long to expand the 1-5 Freeway in the Southwest Washington corridor? Only two lanes and its a very dangerous place to drive threw.

[Willjk89]

Rossi 2008!