Consider the ridiculous scenarios of this ruling. I advise Washington’s Board of Pharmacy to develop some backbone:
What about being refused AZT because a druggist assumes the HIV-positive patient is gay and disapproves of his or her “lifestyle?” (To me that always sounded like disliking someone’s taste in patio furniture rather than one’s inherent sexual orientation.)
What if it’s a pharmacist who may or may not be Tom Cruising spiritual waters aboard the SS Scientology? Say he’s opposed to filling prescriptions for antidepressants? Couldn’t happen? It recently did right here in this state.
