A drugstore employee in WI refused to sell condoms

[Ocelot II]

to a (married) woman because it was "against his faith."

Jessica Pentz had every right to buy what she liked off the shelves of that Wisconsin Walgreens.

But your rights today can disappear tomorrow. The Supreme Court taught us that.

Especially when your right is someone else's wrong.

Pentz and her husband, Nate, drove to a particularly beautiful stretch of Wisconsin over the July 4th weekend. She'd forgotten her oral contraceptives back home in Minneapolis, so they pulled up to a drug store in Hayward and she headed inside to pick up a box of condoms and some other items.

..."Well, we can sell that to you," he clarified. "But I will not, because of my faith."

The rest at https://www.startribune.com/the-battle-for-reproductive-rights-moves-to-the-front-register/600188979/

This is where it's going, folks, if we don't stop it.

[Celerity]

1. sue the fuck out of them I say, fuck that christofash bellend

[onenote]

4. Unfortunately, there is nothing for which they can sue the clerk, or Walgreens.

While the case law regarding the right to obtain contraception still stands, it always has been, like most constitution rights, a protection against government action, not private action. Walgreens can decide who to serve or not serve and what products to sell, and unless they are engaged in invidious discrimination that would violate the Civil Rights Act, there is nothing that an individual denied service can do about it.

[jaxexpat]

32. How about false advertising? Is that a thing?

It's on the shelves, it's for sale. Right?

Throw some money at the counter and leave with them.

[SCantiGOP]

40. And maybe get arrested

There is no law that requires a store to seek anything to anybody.

[jaxexpat]

81. oooooh, and civil disobedience for a just cause is bad because?

Arrested for what? Underage? Incorrect change? Theft for overpaying?

[onenote]

129. You realize that the whole point of civil disobedience

Last edited Sun Jul 10, 2022, 10:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Is a willingness to break the law and accept the consequences to make a point?

[jaxexpat]

151. Let me see. There are rules now? Trumpists have no rules.

But those fighting the righteous fight use a Marquis is of Queensbury to guide their actions? I may have used a term in error. My concept of civil disobedience is to break the rules in plain sight and disrupt the ease with which injustice pervades our society. If someone wants to challenge the attempt, using the law to do so, the disobedience must be grave enough so that people can clearly see the whole of the interaction. Hell, I thought that's why we have security cameras for anyway. Body cams may save the world unless, in our obsession to follow rules, we forget what justice feels like.

[OMGWTF]

111. THIS! THIS! THIS!

[Maraya1969]

140. Sounds like something I would do. eom

[TheRickles]

41. Isn't this invidious discrimination against non-Christians?

[onenote]

84. No. Presumably the clerk wouldn't sell to anyone regardless of their religion.

And if they were following the Walgreen policy (and the story is ambiguous), the product was available for sale, but the sale had to be handled by a different employee (in this case, the manager was asked to handle the sale and nothing in the story says he also refused).

[Tommymac]

42. Disagree.

Refusing to sell legal contraceptives' could be construed as a Civil Rights violation. The store would need to post this policy for all customers to read.

If that clerk sells contraceptives to anyone else, the posters rights would be violated.

See Jim Crow.

Have a nice day.

[onenote]

130. Under what provision would it be a civil rights violation?

Actually, forcing the clerk to sell the item might be a Civil Rights violation. The law requires businesses to make reasonable accommodations for employees religious beliefs. Which is what the Walgreens policy does by providing that another employee can handle the transaction. Same as when Muslim employees refuse to handle the sale of pork or alcohol.

[Quanto Magnus]

194. That may be, but

they don't have to keep him in a public facing position if he cannot perform the job function as defined?

Make him a janitor.... He doesn't have to worry about violating his faith then.....

[Kaleva]

207. It's Walgreen's policy

"Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request.""

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/07/walgreens-clerk-refuses-sell-condoms-whore

[Sgent]

57. Even more

many states have laws allowing pharmacists and pharm techs to decline dispensing birth control for religious reasons. Its entirely possible some states extend that to OTC birth control methods.

[SouthernDem4ever]

70. How moronic

[orleans]

159. my take on this is that if these people can't do their f&cking jobs they shouldn't be hired

this religious excuse is a bit much.
if they're such snowflakes they should get a job making fucking blankets or something along that line; warm, cozy, comfy, safe.

ugh!

[forgotmylogin]

188. As long as they'll step aside and allow someone else to check them out.

If the whole store doesn't want to sell them, don't carry them.

Similar to how liquor cannot be sold by wait-staff under 21 in restaurants and they have to get a manager to deliver it to a table.

That's fine, as long as they don't kick up a fuss about it. Their beliefs should not prevent sale of merchandise displayed in a store.

And it should also not be the opening for discussion or a lecture on the employees beliefs or the customer's potential lack of them. It should be "One moment, let me get a manager to check you out." Without any "this violates my personal beliefs, blah blah..."

[orleans]

202. meh. what if everyone working in a little liquor store doesn't want to sell alcohol

but they're fine selling lotto tickets and newspapers?

i don't get this picking and choosing what item a snowflake is willing to sell to a customer.

if they can't do their job they shouldn't be hired. go do another job that doesn't run the risk of offending your sensibilities

[azureblue]

58. find out the final cost

inc. tax, and slap the money down on the counter, take a photo of it, and walk out the door. Let the idiot explain why he / she refused to ring it up.. It ain't shoplifting if you paid for it..

[HuskyOffset]

171. That's not how that works

If the merchant won’t sell it to you & you take it anyway, that’s theft. It doesn’t matter if you leave $$, the merchant has to agree to the sale.

[SouthernDem4ever]

173. Buy em on Amazon

if everyone does that these dumb stores will change their policies real quick, such as put the religious idiots in the stock room and leave them there.

[MiniMe]

192. They didn't have time. Apparently they wanted to have sex that night, so they

stopped by the drugstore to get BC. Amazon tends to be quick, but not that quick.

[SouthernDem4ever]

204. well they will plan ahead next time

lol

[NullTuples]

122. Not that the Roberts Court would care, but the CRA Title II protections also cover non-religious ppl

Aka, someone imposing their religion on someone else. "Discrimination on the basis of religion" and all that.

Of course, this court would simply argue that if the clerk treats everyone the same regardless of the customers' religions then no violation has taken place.

[onenote]

131. No one was discriminated against on the basis of religion

The clerk didn’t care about the customers religion or lack thereof. And the Walgreens policy is to have another employee handle the transaction.

It wouldn’t be a violation of law for Walgreens not to carry contraception products. Carrying them but not requiring all employees to handle transactions involving them is no more a civil rights violation than Target allowing Muslim employees not to handle the sale of pork or alcohol. Indeed the Civil Rights Act requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for their employees religious beliefs.

[onenote]

132. No one was discriminated against on the basis of religion

The clerk didn’t care about the customers religion or lack thereof. And the Walgreens policy is to have another employee handle the transaction.

It wouldn’t be a violation of law for Walgreens not to carry contraception products. Carrying them but not requiring all employees to handle transactions involving them is no more a civil rights violation than Target allowing Muslim employees not to handle the sale of pork or alcohol. Indeed the Civil Rights Act requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for their employees religious beliefs.

[NullTuples]

142. That's the Roberts Court interpretation.

But discrimination did occur.

And it was due to religion.

Thus, "discrimination on the basis of religion" is applicable.

[onenote]

143. No. That's the consistent interpretation of the law for decades.

If you have a precedent that says otherwise, please share.

[NullTuples]

158. I think you are missing the point; the Roberts Court doesn't care about precedent.

[orleans]

157. the clerk is not walgreens; the clerk is a clerk and

walgreens should fire his ass (did they? i didn't click on the link)

[whopis01]

183. It appears it is Walgreens policy to allow employees to do this

Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request."

It looks like the manager was called in to handle the sale:

"So the clerk asked his manager to ring him completely out of the register, to avoid any digital contact with a condom, Pentz said, and walked away with a smirk."

[Bluethroughu]

163. Religion is part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act?

He said directly because his faith.

These people will use their religion for everything they don't want or care to do. This pandemic has shown us, we need our 1st Amendment Rights back now before they won't sell food because their Bible says.

Freedom from Religion!

[NotHardly]

19. How many things will they put on that "based on my sincerely held beliefts, I refuse you the right?

1. Food
2. Water
3. Housing
4. the very air you breath
5. Medical attention/care

[azureblue]

59. or flip it--

to the store idiot:
"Do you eat pork?
Do you have tattoos?
It is my sincere religious belief to not talk with sinners who do that. So I demand, in the name of my religion, that you find another person I can speak with."

[Bluethroughu]

165. That's where we will be going.

If you are not wearing a lowercase t on your person.

We already had the mask mandate overturned in the middle of a pandemic because religion?? Where does it discuss pandemic precautions in the bible?Bible?? Or any other religion?

Yet they won that precedent in court! The laws are being dismantled for chaos!

[mahatmakanejeeves]

169. To which case are you referring?

There have been several challenges. Thanks.

We already had the mask mandate overturned in the middle of a pandemic because religion??

[Bluethroughu]

189. In Illinois last I heard, after right wing judge ruled and they opened up 100%.

I don't believe they challenged the ruling.

[paleotn]

2. Pharmacists have been pulling this crap for years.

Nothing new.

Said Walgreens employee should be immediately fired. He can ask Jebus to pay his bills. Tots and pears.

[onenote]

5. Apparently the Walgreens store in question allows employees not to sell items

Last edited Mon Jul 11, 2022, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)

that they choose not to sell.

So I don't see the employee being fired.

[paleotn]

7. I suppose the Walgreens mothership needs to be show the light.

[bluestarone]

46. They need to MOVE these type employees to

Stocking store shelves!

[Rebl2]

63. Not on the

Last edited Sun Jul 10, 2022, 06:04 PM - Edit history (1)

over the counter b.c. aisle.

[JI7]

96. There are many other areas. At least it won't require rejecting basic customer service

[Rebl2]

103. Yes

[WiVoter]

170. Where Exactly Is The Store?

I can’t open the article.

[UpInArms]

3. Wtf?

If you won’t sell the products that are for sale in the business in which you are employed … you should be fired and taken to court by the customer and your employer

[onenote]

6. See posts #4 and 5

[UpInArms]

9. So you say

eom

[onenote]

22. Yep I do. You don't have to accept it

Last edited Sun Jul 10, 2022, 05:04 PM - Edit history (1)

If being willfully blind is your thing.

[UpInArms]

67. If the store puts an item for sale on its shelves and then refuses to sell it

That is false advertising

If they allow employees to write their own rules, they are foolish to allow continued employment to anyone not selling the products they advertise for sale (placing them on a shelf to be viewed as an item to be purchased)

Think on it some more, please

[onenote]

76. Except it appears they were willing to sell it.

The article isn't clear, but implies that the manager took over and rang up the purchase, which is consistent with what Walgreen described as it's policy.

So...not false advertising. And while I agree 100% that its foolish to employ someone in a drug store who won't sell the store's products -- and I'd stop shopping at such a store if I was ever treated the way that family was -- that's not the basis for a lawsuit.

[Hortensis]

102. May be too factual and honest for some markets, but thanks.

These days I'd stop shopping there AND post it simply and factually on all the internet sites people use to share for sharing their experiences with other locals. A whole LOT of consumers use contraception.

[SCantiGOP]

38. You are right, onenote

No different that a store saying “due to shortages, limit of one per customer.”

[UpInArms]

69. There was no shortage

And this would make it “limit of none” because of the sky daddy bs

[SCantiGOP]

108. I know

That’s why I said it would be similar to that.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

8. My faith says these people do their job or f-ing quit on the spot!

and take this f-ing losers license cause he and all the others who pull this crap should.

You get hired, do the job, if you can't quit on the spot and move the F-on !!!

These people have no courage.

In the future buy condoms from the gas station, cause you know they will not judge you.

[whathehell]

10. Should she have sent her HUSBAND to buy them?

Would the employee's faith have permitted that?

[momta]

71. That's my question.

Someone above said that if the employee sells condoms to anyone ELSE, that might be grounds for a discrimination suit.

[whathehell]

110. Interesting..

and it might merit a dis crimination case, because if he won't sell condoms to a married woman, who WILL he sell them to?

[Lovie777]

11. Did he also refuse to sell to the husband?.....

What about men in gerenal.

[Retrograde]

34. Good point!

Men buy condoms to prevent venereal disease. Women buy them because they're on the prowl for sex. I wouldn't be surprised if that is what that clerk was thinking.

[wnylib]

153. Women also buy condoms to prevent STDs.

There are women on the pill or with an IUD who insist that their partners use condoms.

[Hekate]

12. George W. Bush and his "conscience exceptions"

I was paying attention at the time. Was anybody else on our side?

[KentuckyWoman]

20. Agreed. We didn't get here overnight.

I hear people upset about the supply chain and wonder where everyone was when unions were begging America to buy American so manufacturing would stay here. Now we get articles crowing about how someone brought manufacturing to the US and all I can think is it should never have left.

Same with the war against theocracy. They've been taking it by inches for decades. The demise of Roe got everyone's attention but we've been heading this way for a long time.

You know I'm an oldie ... probably won't be here when eventually America rights itself, but oiy, I wish the magic wand could be waved to avoid the painful path ahead ...

[Hekate]

45. All true. We are probably of an age, too

I’d have missed experiencing Obama if we’d left during BushCheney, I’ll say that much. He and his family were amazing.

But the backlash has been incredibly disheartening. We are fortunate to be in California but we are also too old to leave the country. I never thought I’d feel like this.

[Mariana]

92. Plenty of Christians on our side thought that was just fucking dandy. nt.

[LoisB]

13. I stopped patronizing Walgreens years ago. Why bother having the condoms in the store if

selling them depends on which clerk is on duty? I wonder if the clerk avoids the condom aisle lest one jump out and violate his sanctimonious ass?

[IronLionZion]

14. How about life saving medicines next?

My faith demands you must die. God loves you. Have a blessed day.

[Auggie]

15. Oh gee, just go to another store. But write to the corporate office, too.

The is a huge PR problem for Walgreens. And they're more empowered and motivated to stop it.

[dalton99a]

18. Walgreens doesn't care:

Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request."

[CloudWatcher]

28. And if another staff member also has issues?

I can't believe Walgreen's puts up with this. I'm guessing they have a hard time finding people willing to work for minimum wages.

Have to wonder if that clerk also refuses to stock the shelves with products they don't approve.

[Auggie]

36. Good grief n/t

[JanLip]

16. ???

Why have the condoms in the store to begin with if they won’t sell them. This is crazy! How embarrassing for that lady. WTH

[riverbendviewgal]

21. Exactly

That is common sense

[ItsjustMe]

17. Woman Exposes Walgreens For Withholding Her Birth Control - Rebel HQ

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017748879

[Demovictory9]

23. Kick

[question everything]

24. Why even stock it?

[FakeNoose]

25. Time to boycott Walgreens!

[LuckyCharms]

26. I would have shoplifted them in that case. Because of my faith.

[SoCalDavidS]

56. A Shithole Store Like That, Would Likely Call The Cops

And guess who would be the one to get prosecuted? Hint, it wouldn't be the Ignorant employee.

[azureblue]

64. as I said up stream

Put the money on the counter and take a photo of it. Then it becomes a matter of the employee refusing to ring up a sale. And you cant get arrested for shoplifting if you paid for the item. If they call the cops, then the employee will have to explain why they refused to ring up to sale, and you can say "I thought the employee was going to pocket the money. I gave it to him / her, he she did not ring it up, and here is the photo." IOW, turn it into a matter of employee theft.

[Ocelot II]

27. I don't get why someone whose "faith" opposes contraceptives

would even work in a place that sells them. Even if he doesn't have to personally ring up the sale, his salary is paid in some small part by the sale of contraceptives - condoms and prescription items and drugs. He gets to feel all righteous and pure when on account of his religion he refuses to sell a legal product to a person legally trying to buy it, but if he really wanted to be more than merely performative regarding his faith, he wouldn't work at a drugstore at all.

[lonely bird]

172. This!

Spot on.

Time to do what the religionists fear despite their bluster.

They want their faith/religion in the public square? OK, let’s start debating their dogma in the public square.

[moose65]

201. Spot on

I really don't even see how condoms could "go against" someone's faith. What sin is being committed if a condom is used?

People like this clerk need to get over themselves. I am sure that this Walgreens also sells wine, beer, cigarettes, and any number of other "sinful" things.

[Lucky Luciano]

29. Throw money on the floor, take the condoms, and walk out.

[Ocelot II]

30. ??

[Lucky Luciano]

31. Motherfucking autocorrect is the bane of my existence

[3catwoman3]

35. Did I miss something good?

I could use a laugh.

[Lucky Luciano]

62. An utter nonsense post. My posts are often filled with iPhone typos and autocorrects gone mad...

…sometimes they are totally unintelligible…I often write and immediately post and then see the garbage. Editing on the phone is a pain too, so sometimes, I just say screw it and post if it’s close enough…this time was very far off!

[Bristlecone]

88. I feel you I'm that. I am almost exclusively a DU'er by way of iPhone

I have to edit probably 1 in 5 posts.

[petronius]

73. If a post is edited after 30 minutes, there's a red link to see what the edits were

If a post is edited quicker than 30 minutes (I think it's 30 anyway), you can still click the "permalink" button to access the edit history...

[TheFarseer]

33. If you are Muslim and work at Kroger

Can you sell bacon to customers? Asking for Christofascist friend. I’m guessing this guy would have no time for that crap just like no one should have any time for this.

[Dr. Strange]

85. Can you? Yes.

Do you have to? No.

Generally, stores will move Muslim workers around so they don't have to touch alcohol or pork.

[onenote]

86. Instances of Muslims declining to handle pork and alcohol sales have arisen in the past.

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna17665989

Right-wingers typically go ballistic about it.

[SpankMe]

37. Self checkouts

Self checkout stands are replacing human checkers for financial reasons. People are expensive.

But, I'll bet that this "I-can't-sell-you-this-because-of-my-religion" crap is also on the list of reasons why stores want to go to with self checkouts, although it's probably very low on the list.

Also, if Walgreens tolerates this kind of bullshit from their employees, they should have a firm policy that the clerks may not state out loud why they won't process a purchase. They should just ding for a manager and step back. Public humiliation of customers can't possibly be protected by free speech.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

49. Free speech

isn't protected by private employers. Assuming the firing isn't based on discrimination, unless an employee is covered by a union contract, said employee can fired for saying anything the employer doesn't like.

Having said that, I was under the impression that although individual clerks could refuse to sell something due to religious beliefs, the store had to either a) have someone else there that would sell the item or b) refer them to another location where they could buy the item.

[Sympthsical]

177. A lot of stores are locking up sex-related items

Not just contraceptives like condoms. Anything related gets put in the cabinet like lube, etc.

I usually order things from Amazon, but sometimes one forgets one's out. I looooove going to Safeway or CVS in these instances. Let's just ring that bell and get the teenaged clerk over here. We want this to be as awkward for the both of us as humanly possible.

One time, my partner and I were both there. Rang the bell. Waited. A clerk who looked like they were maybe 12 started walking over. I turned to my partner. "Nope. I'm out. This is all you. Have fun!"

I don't generally have any kind of social anxiety, but having to get a child to come unlock your dirty sex stuff will never not send mine to about an 11.

[3catwoman3]

39. Ask this busybody...

...how many children he has.

It sure would be interesting to know if things had gone differently had the man tried to make the purchase.

[SCantiGOP]

43. An old George Carlin line:

Have you ever noticed that the people who oppose birth control are people you wouldn’t want to fuck anyway?

[Totally Tunsie]

50. Just one more reason to love GC.

[ironflange]

106. Ha!

[Upthevibe]

44. .........................

...............PLEASE SOMEONE..............MAKE THIS NIGHTMARE STOP!!!

[BidenRocks]

47. They are likely locked up.

No key around.
Nice country we have here.

[forgotmylogin]

186. I found the best strategy is Target self-check out.

Nobody sees what you buy, and they don't tend to lock up prophylactics - at least the larger packages, although that may vary by store.

It also helps if you're younger and slightly embarrassed making a purchase.

[hadEnuf]

48. Then they needed to get a cashier over there who could sell those condoms.

That cashier needs to find another job that will not interfere their faith. They are not performing to their job specifications so they should be transferred or terminated.

[ShazzieB]

91. That's what they did.

It's in the article.

The clerk waved his manager over, as Pentz waited with her perfectly legal purchases that were none of his business. He offered to ring up everything that wasn't a condom. She declined.

So the clerk asked his manager to ring him completely out of the register, to avoid any digital contact with a condom, Pentz said, and walked away with a smirk.

[hadEnuf]

117. The cashier is definitely looking for attention.

Help is tough to get right now so businesses are catering to this nonsense. My hunch is that this is simply another right wing whacko political stunt.

Refusing to sell condoms is asinine.

[3catwoman3]

119. "...to avoid any digital contact...

...with a condom."

He can't even touch a box of unused ones? Sheesh! Does that mean he can't stock the shelves with these or any other contraceptive products?

Pathetic religious snowflake.

[Sympthsical]

120. It's a thing

While discussing this story with him, my partner was telling me of a pharmacy technician who will literally not handle contraception. Will not touch. Someone else has to do it. The company has to respect it because of the conscience clause.

This is in California.

This stuff happens more than people think.

[Brainfodder]

51. Refusing service for condoms? Sorry sir, they are on the shelf for sale, you are an imbecile!

[GoCubsGo]

167. I am amazed that no one else has pointed this out.

If he doesn't like selling them, he should find another job. Unfortunately, thanks to our corrupt, radical Supreme Court, we're in for a lot more of this kind of bullshit from now on.

[Peacetrain]

52. Just finished reading about this a few minutes ago.. and my hair is on fire

arrgh..

[dalton99a]

53. Can't get birth control. Can't get an abortion.

Must have babies

[BlueIdaho]

54. So this is ok with the drugstore?

I’d be surprised…

[SoCalDavidS]

55. Time For Yelp To Do It's Thing

They may have the right to refuse service, but WE have the right to boycott the shit out of that location, and let others know what they're up to.

Bonus points if it went National, so that Walgreens Corporate notices.

[MineralMan]

60. Almost unbelievable, but Wisconsin.

[Rebl2]

61. Time to

start calling on management of these stores to tell them what is happening.
I don’t think Walgreens wants to start losing sales because of this. Seems like this is the second story about Walgreens I have heard doing this type thing. The other was a woman not being able to get her birth control that had been filled at a Walgreens pharmacy because who ever she was dealing with at the pharmacy wouldn’t let her get the prescription.

[Oppaloopa]

179. They might even lose their big insurance sales over this

Having a pregnancy and labor is much more expensive than a box of condoms.

[Sympthsical]

65. The conscience clause is not new

Although it will now receive a lot more attention because of incidents like this.

As it should.

The conscience clause is there for a reason, and it goes beyond abortion. For example, medications used in assisted suicide. There are entire programs for pharmacists about that one.

But condoms? Twit.

[Marthe48]

66. s.c. would side with the clerk

using free exercise clause of the U.s. Constitution-what they are doing if this were a case before them.

To combat the willful evil of clerks like that, businesses need to have guidelines in place to have the willfully evil clerk take a coffee break and let a responsible person ring up the sale.

I imagine that in today's climate, the place is short-staffed, much like the clerk.

[Alwaysna]

68. Smirking clerk needs doxed & his home protested.

[wnylib]

154. +1000

[PJMcK]

72. Here's the problem

Many responses to the OP suggest suing the drugstore. Consider how much that would cost! The plaintiff would be spending thousands of dollars for a suit against a very big corporation. If they win, they get to buy a dozen condoms.

Seriously, is that worth the cost? To me, the free market suggests I go across the street to the gas station and buy them there. Walgreens would lose my business and I’d inform the manager why.

Lawsuits are ridiculously expensive. Condoms are not.

[live love laugh]

75. Probably an incel projectionist.

[live love laugh]

82. My response was describing the clerk not you.

I posted it wrong sorry. It wasn’t supposed to be a reply.

[PJMcK]

83. Sorry for my misinterpretation

I’ll delete my post.

Still, have a good week!

[Sympthsical]

78. They have to look at their state laws

Because, depending on the company and the laws stated on the books, there could be a lot to unpack there.

It seems like most of the responses don't understand these laws have always existed Which state you're in makes a difference in these things, because what they cover and how far they go varies. I tried finding Wisconsin's statutes, and I only got as far as hospitalization and medication involving abortion medication and surgery. I wanted to know how far the contraception idea went. Maybe someone can find that.

Most of these laws mandate that someone else has to sell/fill a prescription or transfer care to someone else who is willing to do what the patient is asking. In this story, the cashier had to get a manager.

And Walgreens, being a company in pretty much every state, is going to allow for whatever that state's law is.

[PJMcK]

90. Agreed regarding state laws

My point was one of a practical nature. If I wanted some condoms, I’ll take my business elsewhere and make sure the management knows why.

That clerk was really quite ignorant and probably violated the company rules. If the store sells condoms, the clerk cannot decide on their own who can buy them.

Sure, there’s probably a lawsuit here but I wouldn’t be motivated to commit the time and money over condoms. That’s me and others may disagree. I can buy them at gas stations, convenience stores and even some supermarkets. Why would I pick a fight with Walgreens?

[Sympthsical]

93. Walgreens might not have a choice

I suppose that's what I'm trying to point out.

As I said, I haven't been able to find the applicable Wisconsin statutes to see what's going on in that state. And considering how goofy they've gotten in the past ten years, who knows what might be on the books now.

[XorXor]

184. Plus I don't think there is much of anything to sue about in this case

She wasn't outright denied service by the store. It was a single clerk who moved aside so the manager could complete the purchase. In this thread there were mentions of similar situations with regards to Muslims ringing up pork and alcohol products. I don't think anyone here would support someone suing a store or clerk in those situations so long as the service is ultimately rendered by someone.

Now, I suppose there is plenty of room for debate on if stores should be required to offer these accommodations for religious employees.

[liberal N proud]

74. I am sick of these religious fucks forcing their beliefs on others.

[RocRizzo55]

80. And what about MY belefs?

If I, as a customer wants to buy something legally in the store for sale, and someone will not sell it to me because of their religious beliefs. what about my religious beliefs, or even my belief in no religion? Isn't this a violation of MY rights?

[Scrivener7]

87. Yeah. Jesus is going to be giving a lot of these little shits a boner because they

think they have power now.

[Bettie]

89. Assholes abound

and they are everywhere.

And if your job is to ring up the stuff that a store sells, you should just do that.

[Beartracks]

94. I don't think the owner should be too happy to have ...

... a) potentially lost a sale, but also b) a lawsuit against his business for discrimination against a customer based on the customer's religious beliefs.

=========

[usedtobedemgurl]

95. Wrote to corporate...

Said I will not be darkening their doors if they allow folks to deny a sale. Said I would encourage everyone I know to do the same, so please boycott these folks and encourage those you know to do the same.

[bucolic_frolic]

97. Sue the store for resulting pregnancies

Sometimes situations can be shaken down and plaintiffs paid to walk away.

[Ocelot II]

101. That's nonsense; they'd get thrown out of court instantly.

[XorXor]

185. She wasn't prevented from purchasing the condoms. The clerk signed out and the manager completed the

transaction. I'm not sure there is much of a lawsuit that could be had here.

[JI7]

98. But his Christian Beliefs don't get in the way of working for that company

which makes money off condoms and other birth control.

From which he would get paid.

[Ocelot II]

99. All this talk of suing Walgreens is ridiculous. There's no legal cause of action.

However, there's no reason why they can't be shamed for employing people who refuse to do their jobs.

[Sympthsical]

121. They don't have a choice

They can't ask about religion during the applications process. Religion is a protected class.

However, once hired, the employee has an obligation to inform his employer of his religious accommodation.

There have been cases in the past where an employee didn't fully let the pharmacy know ahead of time they wouldn't fill prescriptions regarding birth control. Well, when that employee is the only one working that weekend, and he won't fill something, there's a problem.

So, then there are two options. Someone who doesn't have an objection is on site to fulfill the patient's need. Or, the hospital/pharmacy transfers the prescription and makes accommodation (i.e. pays for an Uber) if the patient's access to healthcare is compromised due to inability to travel, etc.

At least, that's how it goes here in California with my partner's company.

[Bettie]

100. if someone refused to serve this guy

in any way, because he's an asshole, he'd sue because "religious discrimination" in a heartbeat.

[Martin68]

104. How can you work for a retail enterprise if you refuse to sell some of their products?

These Christian Taliban whackos are something.

[Ocelot II]

210. It's like if you're morally opposed to porn but you're working

at an adult bookstore because the pay is better. You just won't ring up the purchases.

[Ocelot II]

105. Today I did go to a Walgreen's, and I bought makeup and cat food.

I did not buy condoms, but let's say I did, and that I went to the checkout counter with all these items. And let's say the cashier wouldn't ring up the condoms because his religion forbids it, and called over another cashier who wouldn't ring up the makeup because his religion believes women shouldn't wear makeup, and he called over yet another cashier who wouldn't ring up the cat food because his religion holds that cats are demonic. The potential for lunacy and chaos is endless.

[Gore1FL]

107. I would thank them for the gift and walk out. nt

[onenote]

128. I'm betting you wouldn't.

[TeamProg]

109. Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members

to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request."

[keithbvadu2]

112. Ask him what his faith is and demand another cashier because it offends you.

Ask him what his faith is and demand another cashier because it offends you.

Many Protestants and Catholics consider each other to be false Christians.

-----------------------

And you must be served next because you waited your turn in line.

[Skittles]

113. if anyone pulled that crap on me in a store

I would them very sorry indeed they did that

[onenote]

125. Precisely what would you do?

[Skittles]

135. ..... modiifed to be PC

and said F*** YOUR FAITH

[onenote]

138. I'm betting you wouldn't.

And I'd support having you prosecuted if you did.

Same as I'd support having any Right Wing asshole prosecuted if they punched a Muslim employee for refusing to handle a transaction involving the sale of a pork product.

[Skittles]

141. LOL

you don't know me

and FUCK these sanctimonious assholes, if there is job duty you can't handle, GET ANOTHER FUCKING JOB THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT ACTION

absolutely DONE here

[ybbor]

114. She should have simply taken them

“I offered to pay for a product the store sells and they wouldn’t accept my money, so I assumed they were free of charge. I tried to pay and they declined to take my payment for an item they sell. Sorry.”

[Ocelot II]

116. According to the article, she was able to buy them from a different cashier.

[ybbor]

118. Well at least there was someone with sense present.

Thanks for the info

[onenote]

123. Which is why so many of the posts here arguing

That there are grounds for a lawsuit are mistaken.

[Ocelot II]

133. Yup. It's offensive and infuriating but not actionable.

[DFW]

168. I would have been tempted to try that

“You have these items in your store for sale. Are you saying you will not take my money for them? Will you accuse me of theft if I try to walk out of here without paying for them? If so, I hereby offer to pay for them. If you refuse my money, take up the inventory discrepancy with your manager. I am offering to pay for them right here and now and I’m filming it, along with your refusal to accept my payment.”

[soldierant]

115. Betcha a buck he wold have somd them to her inseminator in a New York minute.

[malthaussen]

124. Girl I worked with was similar...

... back in '74 I worked at the Mini-Mart at a local NAS, kind of like a 7-Eleven for military personnel. We had a beautiful dumb blonde Christian cashier who was virtually a caricature of the species. A Navy rating put some condoms on the counter for her to ring up, and she positively asked him "What do you want these for?" But even she didn't go so far as to refuse to sell them.

If people cannot do the jobs for which they were hired due to some religious scruple, then they need to resign. Period, end of story. You don't get to keep the job if you're not willing to do it (in a reasonable world, anyway).

-- Mal

[wackadoo wabbit]

126. I think it's time for a Walgreens boycott. Who's with me?

This is not the first, nor even the second, nor even the third time I've read of a situation like this occurring at a Walgreens. After the second time, I vowed not to go there any more and to never fill a prescription there.

If we all boycotted Walgreens — and let the corporate office know why at 800–925–4733 — perhaps they'd start ensuring that their employees aren't pushing their personal religion on customers.

[onenote]

139. What about boycotting Target

which doesn't require its Muslim employees to handle transactions involving the sale of pork products?

[wackadoo wabbit]

144. These are two separate issues

Islam forbids Muslims from touching anything that's considered unclean, and, to them, pork is considered unclean.

There is absolutely *nothing* in the Bible that forbids Christians or Jews from touching birth control. Indeed, in the book of Esther, potential wives of a king were required to anoint themselves with myrrh, a known contraceptive at the time, for a full year.

Here's an article you might want to read. It's titled "The Practice of Birth Control in the Book of Esther."

https://www.jewishideasdaily.com/docLib/20100223_ProuserEstherArticle.pdf

Why are you being disruptive? If you don't want to boycott Walgreens, then don't. If you're upset with Target's position on this, then go ahead and boycott them.

But please don't go making false equivalencies.

[onenote]

147. The Bible doesn't define what is a sincerely held religious belief that has to be accommodated

1. Are employers required to accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of applicants and employees?
Yes. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on religion. This includes refusing to accommodate an employee's sincerely held religious beliefs or practices unless the accommodation would impose an undue hardship (more than a minimal burden on operation of the business). A religious practice may be sincerely held by an individual even if newly adopted, not consistently observed, or different from the commonly followed tenets of the individual religion.

[wackadoo wabbit]

152. So if a Christian has a "sincerely held religious belief" that they shouldn't serve Black people,...

for example, then I guess that's OK?

Because that's where this line of reasoning leads.

I stand by my comments in my last post here, but let me expand upon them: Are you in favor of what the Walgreen's employee did? If not, why are you arguing against my call for a boycott?

[onenote]

175. I'm not in favor of it -- as an earlier post of mine indicated.

And I think there are grounds for firing the employee -- not because he refused to serve the customer, but because he was disrespectful to the customer in doing so. Walgreen's has a policy that addresses this situation. If the employee didn't follow that policy to the letter -- and I don't think he did from what has been reported -- that's ground for dismissal.

As for boycotts -- I generally find that they don't hurt the targeted corporation as much as they hurt people who don't deserve to be hurt.

[pnwmom]

134. The employee should be fired, for cause.

His religious rights don't matter in this case. If someone's religion prevents them from carrying out the job, then the employer doesn't have to hire him or retain him. And his job should consist of processing ANY sale that the store makes.

He should look for another job that wouldn't compromise his principles, like pulling weeds or digging ditches.

(Yes, I know the employer found him another position to accommodate his scruples. But the employer wasn't obligated to do that.)

[onenote]

137. Almost everything you just wrote is wrong.

Why would he be fired for cause when Walgreen's policy expressly allows its employees to forego handling transactions as to which they have a moral objection? It's right there in the article linked in the OP, but apparently you skipped over it: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request."

Indeed, forcing an employee to violate their religious beliefs (or refusing to hire them or firing them for such) would itself expose the employer to an action for violating the Civil Rights Act, which requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees religious beliefs, which is what the Walgreens policy does. This is nothing new. It has come up in other contexts, such as Muslim employees of Target declining to handle sales of pork products. Target makes a similar accommodation of those beliefs by finding them other positions or by having other employees handle those particular transactions.

[pnwmom]

145. I said what SHOULD be, not what is. Walgreens doesn't have to have that policy,

and it's a stupid one, because it allows people like this grandstander to mistreat customers.

[onenote]

146. How does the EEOC document support your position?

It doesn't.

You wrote that Walgreens isn't required to have a policy of accommodating its employees religious beliefs. But, in fact, that is what the law requires, as the EEOC policy statement makes clear.

From the very first paragraph of that statement:

1. Are employers required to accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of applicants and employees?
Yes. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on religion. This includes refusing to accommodate an employee's sincerely held religious beliefs or practices unless the accommodation would impose an undue hardship (more than a minimal burden on operation of the business). A religious practice may be sincerely held by an individual even if newly adopted, not consistently observed, or different from the commonly followed tenets of the individual's religion.

[pnwmom]

148. Only if it involves only minimal hardship to the employer. If there is only one clerk

and that clerk refuses to handle a whole category of products, that seems like more than minimal hardship to me.

[onenote]

149. The employer isn't claiming it imposes a hardship.

So the discussion ends there.

on edit: there is no evidence that this Walgreens had only one employee. If it did, it would be truly unique amongst Walgreens.

[ecstatic]

136. Here we go. Clearly orchestrated BS

And the Fascist Five will ram this through because they don't really give a fuck what we think. They don't think we're going to do anything about it. I hope they're wrong.

[Rhiannon12866]

150. Then he should find another job.

[progree]

155. I wonder what the pharmacy employee thinks of male masturbation

If one has sex using a condom, or if one masturbates, isn't that the same thing -- wasting those hundreds of millions of precious little half-lives just for pleasure and relief?

And, in the act of proper Christian procreation, why would the infinitely wise and infinitely perfect Creator come up with a reproductive system that waste hundreds of millions of those precious half-lives to achieve just one fertilization?

[Historic NY]

156. Walgreen needs to have less customers

a product they sell and they leave it up to employees to sell it or not ,

[Mr. Ected]

160. The customer has no cause of action against Walgreens or its employee

However, Walgreens can terminate the clerk's employment, and should, and probably will.

[Meowmee]

161. Only in this crazy as fuck country and maybe a few crazy as fuck others do we see this crap

USA you are a JOKE. You have separation of church and state, supposedly, lol. Next they should start arresting men who masturbate.

[The Jungle 1]

162. There are fascist among us.

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by dictatorial power, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition.
It is our patriot duty to stop them.

[winagawaukee]

164. Condom size is the real issue

It comes down to the size of the gun the purchaser is buying with the condoms. A buyer may only buy small size condoms with large guns.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

166. She was, after a while, able to make her purchase.

Last edited Mon Jul 11, 2022, 08:38 AM - Edit history (2)

{Edited: I see that this has already been pointed out several times. Sorry.}

The clerk waved his manager over, as Pentz waited with her perfectly legal purchases that were none of his business. He offered to ring up everything that wasn't a condom. She declined.

So the clerk asked his manager to ring him completely out of the register, to avoid any digital contact with a condom, Pentz said, and walked away with a smirk.

Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request."

The Hayward store management declined comment. Social media suggests John the clerk may have been moved off the register and into a department less likely to bring him into direct contact with prophylactics.

[milestogo]

178. "digital contact with a condom"

[Borchkins]

174. Visit to Hayward Walgreens

I am passing through Hayward this week with friends and plan to make a stop at this Walgreens. Seems as if all 5 of us (post-menopausal women) need condoms, lube etc. 2if us are lawyers, if needed.

[Ocelot II]

182. Lawyers aren't needed; what Walgreens did was legal, if offensive.

They have to accommodate the religious beliefs of their employee, however stupid they might be (this has been the law for a long time), and they handle these situations by having another cashier ring up the purchase, which is what happened here (hardly anybody in this thread seems to have read the entire article at the link). What was wrong with the situation is that the employee was kind of snotty and in-your-face about the situation rather than simply sending the customer to another cashier without making a big deal of his religious beliefs. My fear is that Dobbs has emboldened the religious wackos to the point where they will get away with this sort of behavior more and more often, not limiting it to simply referring the customer to another cashier. What happens if all the employees at a particular store (it's certainly possible in some places) start refusing to sell contraceptives because of their religious beliefs? Walgreen's hands are tied because they have to accommodate the employees, and this Supreme Court is likely to back the employees if it got that far. That's what worries me.

If you stop at the Walgreen's in Hayward, though, please do buy some of these items and report back.

[lark]

176. Fire him now, Walgreens!

FFS

[LogicFirst]

180. Leave everything right there in front of the clerk. Walk out. Find another store.

[Ocelot II]

181. Another cashier rang up the purchase.

[liberalmuse]

187. Walgreen's is the usual offender when it comes to this garbage.

They are allowing this so people should stop giving them their business.

[The Bopper]

190. Just wondering

If I pick a job title, such as a Security guard in a mall, do i have a “right” not to help someone, such as a Catholic because I’m Protestant and they end up dying? How about a Catholic doctor who is a heart specialist, refusing to operate on a Protestant? Can we say where does it end?

[localroger]

191. Bottom line, Walgreen's fucked up

They should have fired the first sanctimonious fuckwit who pulled this stunt and weathered the inevitable for-cause challenge. Now all the similar fuckwits are emboldened and WG's will have a steady stream of pissed off customers who have to deal with them. It would have been a lot better for the company to nip it in the bud and deal with that first employee instead of trying to have their cake with the employee and eat it too with customers.

[Kaleva]

196. Apparently it's Walgreen's policy

"Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request.""

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/07/walgreens-clerk-refuses-sell-condoms-whore

[localroger]

198. I remember when they created this stupid policy

It was over a pharmacist who refused to fill a prescription for an oral contraceptive. The woman loudly went to the press complaining that she wasn't even using the drug for birth control, she had the prescription for another health condition. Walgreen's announced this policy during the media shitstorm that followed. And here we observe that when you try to piss nobody off, you actually piss everybody off.

[gay texan]

193. Heres a fun experiment

Walgreens sells jesus stuff around here. Refuse to sell that on religous grounds.

Watch Walgreens change their policy so damn fast your head will spin.

[DallasNE]

195. Walgreens Needs To Take A tion

And fire this person for insubordination. Otherwise I can see organized boycotts.

[Kaleva]

197. It's Walgreen's policy. Cashier won't be fired.

"Asked for comment, Walgreen Co. responded: "Our company policy allows team members to step away from completing a transaction to which they have a moral objection and refer the transaction to a fellow team member or manager who will complete the customer's request.""

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/07/walgreens-clerk-refuses-sell-condoms-whore

[localroger]

199. That ship done sailed

They should have fired the first pharmacist that refused to fill a prescription. But they were too chickenshit to do that, and they will look even worse if they suddenly decide to come down on this guy after tolerating dozens of these asswipes over the years. This isn't news because it's a new thing. It's news because it's not a pharmacist, and it's a front shelf item that doesn't need a prescription.

[DallasNE]

203. Implementation Of Policy

This should be like the 19 year old that can't ring up alcohol. They summon a a 21+ to ring it up and no issue. The assumption is the sale was not completed and that is not in line with company policy and represents insubordination.

[localroger]

205. The problem with this is that if you hire a 19 year old and you sell alcohol, you know

...that you will need to have a 21yo staffer available should a customer come through with a bottle of wine. If one of your pharmacists decides he doesn't like $drug, are you sure you have another around who can fill the order if they refuse? This is a serious problem if there are only a few pharmacies in range and all of them are dealing with this. The rule should be, part of your job is to fill all the prescriptions that are legal and for which we have stock. If you can't do that, find another job.

Handling it the way Walgreens did leaves an open door for ever-expanding craziness. I won't fill this opioid prescription because my brother died of an OD. I won't fill this Antabuse scrip because I don't think alcohol should be stigmatized. I won't sell licorice because I read on the internet it contains toxic chemicals. Where does it end?

The only thing that makes sense as an employer is to make it clear that as a representative of the company you work for it is your responsibility to fulfill all of the company's functions whether you personally like them or not. I have done industrial work for customers who are positively evil in multiple ways, but I do it because it's my job. And I don't grouse about it because I know when I am standing in front of that customer, I am representing the company and not myself and if I make an ass of myself it reflects on people who are trusting me not to do dumbass shit like that.

All of these "I won't sell you that" employees are grandstanding. It's amazing that a corporation the size of Walgreens decided to let this stand.

[Kablooie]

200. The right's rights are rights. The left's rights are wrongs.

According to the Supreme Court

[krispos42]

206. I would have ripped off the barcode and slapped it on the counter

And then slapped the price plus tax on the counter next to it.

And then I would have said "transaction complete", and walked off.

While filming it all on my camera.

[Hekate]

208. Ma'am, the year is 1960 and you should be ashamed of yourself, you slut you

I graduated high school in 1965 in a relatively small town of 25,000. The mindset was that only sexually active males would buy condoms.

[Ocelot II]

209. I graduated the same year.

I didn't even know what they were....

[Hekate]

211. I kinda-sorta did. I surely knew all about the double standard, and made sure to stay far within...

… the female side of it, as the penalty was severe.

These christo-fascists are an abomination.

[bluestarone]

212. Bottom line here is

The ONLY thing that will force this CO. to change ANYTHING is $$$$$. People stop going there might be a start!