ANYONE who follows politics knows that the "morning after" pill has been at the epicenter of a brewing storm of recent controversy. Many people believe that the sale or use of the emergency contraceptive is immoral because it is a form of abortion; it can destroy a fertilized human egg. As such, some pharmacists conscientiously refuse to sell the pill to patients whose doctors have prescribed it. Predictably, this has sparked angry chants of derision from those who fancy themselves steadfast champions of women's rights -- rights, in this case, to healthcare provision.
In acquiescence to such concerns, Illinois recently passed a heavy-handed law which forces all private pharmacies to fill any and all prescriptions which their customers might bring to them. The acute injustice of this authoritarian statute is troubling enough, but the swelling legions of its rabid supporters are downright scary.
The intellectual waters surrounding this issue are inevitably muddied, because of the intense and ongoing clash between pro-life and pro-choice partisans. This traditional conflict, however, is irrelevant to the real question at stake here. The Illinois law is horrible, regardless of what you think about abortion, sex or religion.
What is at stake is the freedom of private individuals and private businesses to choose to stock and sell the products that they want. This is primarily a civil liberties issue, centered on the basic freedom of pharmacists.
One of the fundamental premises of a free society is that each individual has the right to direct his own life however he sees fit, as long as he doesn't interfere with anyone else. If you want to take your private resources and start your own business, you should be able to choose to sell