If it could violate your religious views, don't take the job!

[PivotalSyntax]

@Penguin: Someone who is being deployed overseas to fight in a war is well-aware of what they're getting into. Your analogy would be accurate if the soldier refused to go overseas in the first place, rather than just ditching everybody once he got over there.

The driver is aware of his driving duties, but judging from his reaction, he wasn't aware that he would have to drive someone to Planned Parenthood. If someone joins the military during peacetime and a war starts and they refuse to go overseas, that is much more akin to the driver situation.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The driver/company is lucky that the women didn't sue.

Now that would have stuck.

It's a good thing the owner fired this ya-hoo because a hefty lawsuit from these folks could have put him out of business. I hope he sent another bus dang quick and didn't charge the ladies.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

@Penguin: Someone who is being deployed overseas to fight in a war is well-aware of what they're getting into. Your analogy would be accurate if the soldier refused to go overseas in the first place, rather than just ditching everybody once he got over there.

Not quite. Long before the driver's shift started that day, it was perfectly within the foreknowledge of the driver to know that the potential for this situation existed. He knows the route (or area) he drives, and just like anyone else, he has access to a phone book or Google Maps. It was entirely within his power to determine whether there were any places within his area of responsibility that would create an issue for him if he was dispatched to take someone to them.

The driver is aware of his driving duties, but judging from his reaction, he wasn't aware that he would have to drive someone to Planned Parenthood.

Why would that be?

- Did he not know that Austin has a Planned Parenthood office? This seems unlikely to me, given the fact that he's so anti-abortion that he'd take the action he did.

- Did he simply assume that nobody in his assigned area would ever want to go to Planned Parenthood? If so, I'd say he made a foolish assumption and the consequences are on him.

More likely, I think he was aware of the potential for a conflict, but he ignored it in the hope that it would never materialize into an actual conflict during his shift. This is hardly the pinnacle of moral virtue or standing true to his principles that some people here are making his actions out to be.

If someone joins the military during peacetime and a war starts and they refuse to go overseas, that is much more akin to the driver situation.

No, that would be akin to the situation if the driver had given his letter of resignation when he first heard that Planned Parenthood had opened an Austin office. He waited until people were relying on him to pull his stunt.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Obviously this guy didn't think this one through.

I'm amazed that there are lawyers stupid enough to take this to trial.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The driver/company is lucky that the women didn't sue.

Now that would have stuck.

Indeed. It seems to me that this twit's decision to use his bus as his personal pulpit created a First Amendment violation for the two women: refusal of a government service on the basis of someone's personal religious beliefs.

 

[PivotalSyntax]

@Penguin: I see your point. The article is sort of ambiguous, and I wasn't sure what type of driver he was. I didn't think he was a public bus driver that had a specified route each day. I thought he was like a shuttle bus that specifically picked people up and dropped them off where ever it was required.

 

[Smoke]

The driver/company is lucky that the women didn't sue.

Now that would have stuck.

It's a good thing the owner fired this ya-hoo because a hefty lawsuit from these folks could have put him out of business. I hope he sent another bus dang quick and didn't charge the ladies.

I hope so too.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

@Penguin: I see your point. The article is sort of ambiguous, and I wasn't sure what type of driver he was. I didn't think he was a public bus driver that had a specified route each day. I thought he was like a shuttle bus that specifically picked people up and dropped them off where ever it was required.

Yep. Have ya'll ever seen these rural buses?

They look like the little handicaped school buses (I'm sure that they can handle handicapped folks) and they're like taxi's for folks out in the country. But they aren't taxi's, they are rural public transportation.

This is a public bus driver refusing to pick up someone.

 

[Smoke]

Old CARTS vehicles are auctioned online, so you can get a pretty good idea of what kind of bus Graning was driving:

GovDeals.com - Government Surplus Auctions

They don't get rid of them too quick; one I looked at had 355,000 miles on it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Boy this guy is going to lose big time. I wonder if the judge will turn around and slap a hefty fee on him for violating the rights of the ladies.

What a moron.

Even in Alabama they let black people on the buses - they had to sit in the back. And this guy won't let women on?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The driver is aware of his driving duties, but judging from his reaction, he wasn't aware that he would have to drive someone to Planned Parenthood. If someone joins the military during peacetime and a war starts and they refuse to go overseas, that is much more akin to the driver situation.

Only a fool though would join the military thinking they will never have to see combat. When you join the military, you are joining the army, which exist to fight. If someone refused to go overseas if a war started the soldier would likely be thrown into military prison and face a dishonorable discharge. The driver refused to carry out his duties, and he was fired.

 

[Kathryn]

The analogy of this bus driver refusing to take one woman to a Planned Parenthood clinic for an abortion is not at all akin to a soldier suddenly in the middle of a mission, with his comrades lives hanging in the balance at that very moment, suddenly walking off the battlefield. To try to insist the two scenarios are alike is dishonest at best, and I would not condone the behavior of the soldier in that scenario.

I WOULD condone the behavior of a soldier who, if in the line of normal duty, was told by his platoon leader drive him to a village so he could kill the baby of a civilian, to refuse. He may have known that civilian deaths occur sometimes in battle, and been able to come to grips with that sad truth, but if asked to actually help someone in a non combat situation to kill a baby, he realizes that is beyond what he signed up for.

That's a more accurate analogy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The analogy of this bus driver refusing to take one woman to a Planned Parenthood clinic for an abortion is not at all akin to a soldier suddenly in the middle of a mission, with his comrades lives hanging in the balance at that very moment, suddenly walking off the battlefield. To try to insist the two scenarios are alike is dishonest at best, and I would not condone the behavior of the soldier in that scenario.

The consequences are of course very different in magnitude, but the principle is the same: a person abandons their duty, to the detriment of those who relied on him to fulfil it.

I WOULD condone the behavior of a soldier who, if in the line of normal duty, was told by his platoon leader drive him to a village so he could kill the baby of a civilian, to refuse.

So would I. Such an order would be illegal. Was the bus driver asked to do something illegal?

He may have known that civilian deaths occur sometimes in battle, and been able to come to grips with that sad truth, but if asked to actually help someone in a non combat situation to kill a baby, he realizes that is beyond what he signed up for.

That's a more accurate analogy.

It's not accurate at all, actually, since it's also beyond what the law allows, and beyond what his duty requires (i.e. to perform legal orders of his commanders, roughly).

Now... I understand that you're trying to play the "a fetus is a person" card; while I don't agree with this position, let's go with it for a moment: say that it was common knowledge that one of the activities that this hypothetical army is involved in is murdering civilian children. Would it have been moral for the soldier to have enlisted into such an army in the first place?

 

[Misty]

The analogy of this bus driver refusing to take one woman to a Planned Parenthood clinic for an abortion is not at all akin to a soldier suddenly in the middle of a mission, with his comrades lives hanging in the balance at that very moment, suddenly walking off the battlefield. To try to insist the two scenarios are alike is dishonest at best, and I would not condone the behavior of the soldier in that scenario.

I WOULD condone the behavior of a soldier who, if in the line of normal duty, was told by his platoon leader drive him to a village so he could kill the baby of a civilian, to refuse. He may have known that civilian deaths occur sometimes in battle, and been able to come to grips with that sad truth, but if asked to actually help someone in a non combat situation to kill a baby, he realizes that is beyond what he signed up for.

That's a more accurate analogy.

I wouldn't condone a soldier walking off the battlefield, but I support a woman's right to an abortion.

 

[ZooGirl02]

I so totally agree! If you are considering a job that could violate your religious views, stop considering it! If you are in a job that could violate your religious views, quit and find a job that won't! This whole issue with like pharmacists refusing to dispense birth control is just disgusting in my opinion. The pharmacists are immoral for refusing dispense a legal medication. I am so thankful that my pharmacists don't refuse to dispense birth control!

 

[Misty]

I so totally agree! If you are considering a job that could violate your religious views, stop considering it! If you are in a job that could violate your religious views, quit and find a job that won't! This whole issue with like pharmacists refusing to dispense birth control is just disgusting in my opinion. The pharmacists are immoral for refusing dispense a legal medication. I am so thankful that my pharmacists don't refuse to dispense birth control!

How sick would a pharmacist be to refuse to dispense the birth control pill! They would certainly be sacked if they did that here in the UK.

 

[Kathryn]

I wouldn't condone a soldier walking off the battlefield, but I support a woman's right to an abortion.

I didn't say a woman doesn't have the right to an abortion. And I don't condone a soldier walking off the BATTLEFIELD in the middle of a combat mission.

What I said is that if we are asked to do something on our job that we is against our moral code, we should not compromise our moral values just to keep our job.

That being said, we should be prepared for the consequences of refusing to do something that we disagree with morally. This may include being fired, being dishonorably discharged, being jailed - whatever.

A lawsuit isn't always the best answer - though in some cases it's appropriate. I don't think that it's appropriate in this case, but then I don't have all the facts.

 

[Kathryn]

I so totally agree! If you are considering a job that could violate your religious views, stop considering it! If you are in a job that could violate your religious views, quit and find a job that won't! This whole issue with like pharmacists refusing to dispense birth control is just disgusting in my opinion. The pharmacists are immoral for refusing dispense a legal medication. I am so thankful that my pharmacists don't refuse to dispense birth control!

A pharmacist who works FOR someone else should comply with the requirements of the company he works for. If she knows beforehand that the company policy is to dispense drugs which violate her moral values, she shouldn't work for that company. If at some point the company ADDS drugs which compromise her values, she should leave the company.

However, a pharmacist who owns her own pharmacy has the right to choose which drugs she carries.

And if a pharmacist is going to work for a privately owned pharmacy, and upon asking, realizes that company does not stock meds she believes it should, she should not work there. If they STOP stocking meds she thinks they should, she should quit her job and go work for a company which is a better match for her value system.

Just as if I owned a video store or a book store - I could choose which books or movies I offered. My employees could make suggestions but ultimately it would be my decision.

 

[Misty]

A pharmacist who works FOR someone else should comply with the requirements of the company he works for. If she knows beforehand that the company policy is to dispense drugs which violate her moral values, she shouldn't work for that company. If at some point the company ADDS drugs which compromise her values, she should leave the company.

However, a pharmacist who owns her own pharmacy has the right to choose which drugs she carries.

And if a pharmacist is going to work for a privately owned pharmacy, and upon asking, realizes that company does not stock meds she believes it should, she should not work there. If they STOP stocking meds she thinks they should, she should quit her job and go work for a company which is a better match for her value system.

Just as if I owned a video store or a book store - I could choose which books or movies I offered. My employees could make suggestions but ultimately it would be my decision.

I rather doubt they would be permitted to run a pharmacy over here in the UK if they didn't stock the required drugs, they would soon go out of business anyway.

 

[Kathryn]

I rather doubt they would be permitted to run a pharmacy over here in the UK if they didn't stock the required drugs, they would soon go out of business anyway.

To each his own.

I support business owners' rights to determine what they stock and what services they provide.