John Roberts: equal protection, zero contraception

one of the many disturbing things ive seen these last years is the "pharmacists for life" nonsense - a bunch of fetusfolk who dont believe in science and dont think they should be "forced" to provide emergency contraception to nasty women who've had "the sex".

the movement is disgusting in and of itself, but its much more serious than that - if they are allowed to slip this one through, then the precedent will set us on an abso-fucking-lutely disastrous slippery slope

back in april i quoted an NYT article

"Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Senator Rick Santorum, Republican of Pennsylvania, have introduced the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which would allow a pharmacist to refuse to dispense certain drugs as long as another pharmacist on duty would."

(ill never forgive kerry for that)

of course, once that door is open, the next step is to argue that they shouldnt be required to sell EC so long as there was another pharmacy in town etc etc...

before long, it is obvious that pharmacists could refuse to sell the pill, condoms (although viagra will probably be available OTC, although you may have to sign an affadavit saying that you wont withdraw)

and once that precedent is in place, surely shop-clerks at 7/11 could stop selling tobacco if they so choose - and on and on. and then, before you know it, gas stations could stop selling petrol to darkies, and fags, and anyone else they'd rather shoot than serve.

and taking the scenario a little further, what happens if a redneck cop at the LAPD is asked to investigate the murder of a black man? can the redneck cop claim that he has moral objections to investigating? and doctors will refuse to treat AIDS victims etc etc

in a tongue-in-cheek post in july, i wrote:

" after much consideration, i agree that pharmacists shouldnt have to dispense contraception. its a difficult issue, but on balance, they should have the right to object, conscientiously. if they seriously think that contraception is murder, then they shouldnt have to kill anyone. i just pray to the almighty that they fucking enjoy their new street-sweeping career."

if they cant do their job, then they should just shut the fuck up and go work for james dobson or pat robertson and do the Lawd's work.

so i wasnt surprised to read in the nyt:

"A pregnant teenager went to the grand and imposing county courthouse here early in the summer, saying she wanted an abortion. The circuit court judge refused to hear the case, and he announced that he would recuse himself from any others like it."

Disaster.

"Fourteenth Amendment Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Gay John Roberts doesnt believe in equal protection - particularly "disparate impact". It'll be interesting to see how much he lies about his views of the 14th amendment during the hearings.

As far as Roberts is concerned, institutional bigotry is really cool. It wont be long till america pretends to be separate but equal again - if pharmacists can choose their clients and judges can choose which cases to hear - based on whatever 'morality' they choose, then anything is possible, and many things will be impossible.

God, please save america. please.