[Vision2020] House Bill 216 (Pharmacist Conscience Bill)

[Glenn Schwaller]

Good!  Nice of you to document your "stuff" - Love to hear it.  Although it
seems as if, by a rather overwhelming majority, this rebuttal was just so
much "stuff".

You seem to have forgotten that HB216 did pass.  So once again 54-1718A
Paragraph (3) is on point with respect to discrimination regarding Freedom
of Conscience.  Or perhaps think you don't have to answer to Affirmative
Action who, unfortunately for individuals such as yourself, have reaffirmed
laws making it illegal to ask questions about an applicant's race, beliefs,
marital status, age, sexual orientation, physical abilities or lack thereof,
et cetera.

So, no matter how much you "MOST DEFINITELY would want to know" the answers
to these questions, you can't ask them.

It really is just that simple   :-)

GS


On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:

> Mr. Schwaller stated:
>
> "I can see no wording in HO216 whatsoever that would support MT's claim
> that this bill "allows potential employers to evaluate a pharmacist's job
> application."  Where do you get this stuff?!?!"
>
> I get this "stuff", Mr. Schwaller, from the Idaho Senate floor.  An
> extremely similar example, and this very question, was presented yesterday
> as part of a rebuttal in debate against HB 216.  I have the complete audio
> recording of yesterday's senate debate, to include this specific rebuttal,
> if you are interested.
>
> Once we have discussed this particular rebuttal, I will proceed to
> introduce more "stuff" that was also presented on the Idaho senate floor.
>
> However, concerning HB 216 . . .
>
> If I were in charge of hiring and firing at a local pharmacy, in light of
> HB 216, I am MOST DEFINITELY going to want to know the religious, ethical,
> and moral values of a pharmacist job applicant, and if those values are
> going to impact on the pharmacist's performance of his duties.
>
> It really is just that simple, Mr. Schwaller.
>
> Scheduled for second reading in the Idaho House tomorrow is . . .
>
> Senate Joint Resolution 101.
>
> UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO BOARD OF REGENTS - TUITION - Proposing an amendment to
> the Constitution of the State of Idaho to permit the Board of Regents of
> the University of Idaho to impose rates of tuition and fees on all
> students enrolled in the University of Idaho as authorized by law.
>
> http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2009/SJR101.htm
>
> I figure that SJR 101 will be scheduled for third reading and debate
> either Thursday or Friday.  This should prove most interesting.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> Join us at The First Annual Intolerista Wingding, April 17th, featuring
> Roy Zimmerman and Jeanne McHale.  For details go to . . .
>
> http://www.MoscowCares.com/Wingding
>
> Seeya
> there.
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
>           http://www.fsr.com/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090401/255bd076/attachment.html