This story from the UK Telegraph is another example of Muslims incapable of living in a civilized society. Add this to the Minneapolis Muslim cab drives who refuse to take a fare if the person was drinking or carrying alcohol and the UK can driver who refused to take a blind passenger and his seeing eye dog because it was against the Islamic religion.
A Muslim chemist repeatedly refused a mother the "morning after" pill because of his religious beliefs. Jo-Ann Thomas, a school crossing patrolwoman with two children, was told that even though the item was in stock she should go to her doctor for her supplies. When she was denied the pill at a Lloyds Pharmacy near her home in Thurcroft, Rotherham, she asked why and says she was told the pharmacist was a "deeply religious Muslim".The young lady’s response:
"I am a 37-year-old woman, not a daft girl who doesn't know what she's doing, and the chemist has no right to tell me whether I can or can't take the pill. "It's my choice, not his. It's his religion, not mine. He's a dispensing chemist and his job is to dispense drugs."So how long will this little tactic of forced dhimmitude show Dearborn, MI or Santa Cruz, CA, or Brooklyn, NY?
And what does the pharmacy where the Muslim works have to say about this?
A spokesman for Lloyds, which runs 1,300 UK pharmacies, apologised to Mrs Thomas for her inconvenience. But he referred to a "conscience clause" in the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain's ethics code, saying: "It states that if supplying the morning-after pill is contrary to a pharmacist's personal, religious or moral beliefs they are entirely within their rights not to supply it."
Why do I have the feeling that if the pharmacist were an Orthodox Jew or a devout Christian and he refused to dispense the Morning After Pill, he would be brought up on charges in Britain?