A representative of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom said, mystifyingly:
However, M. Casey Mattox of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom -- the group affiliated with the Christian Legal Society that sued Blagojevich -- said he objects to the provision in Boxer's bill that forces pharmacists to refer patients to another store to get their prescription filled. "Most pharmacies are comfortable with referring. But that will be too much for some. ''No, women aren't inconvenienced by having to go to another pharmacy - they (and society generally) are, however, incredibly inconvenienced by unwanted pregnancy. Which also, by the way, should inconvenience the willfully ignorant pharmacist who has probably encouraged an abortion each time he or she discourages the use of the Pill or the Morning After Pill. Time is of the utmost importance when taking emergency contraception - so that cross-town delay when Joe Pharm denies you and you have to visit Tom Pharm can mean the difference between preventing conception (hey medical expert: sperm lives quite awhile, comparatively speaking) and encouraging irresponsible conception.
He said Congress should be more concerned with protecting the rights of pharmacists than with those of women who might be inconvenienced by having to go another pharmacy to get their prescriptions filled.
Denying the Morning After Pill would be almost understandable (but still not okay) were it not based on a gross, medical misconception (cringe-worthy pun, sorry) that's allowed, if not encouraged, to flourish by the morals police running rampant in our communities and in our legislatures.
There's no "slippery slope" argument here. If you're against abortion, you should be all for the Morning After Pill since it prevents the problem to begin with (not in every case, but frequently). If you're against premarital sex, you're doing a bad job advocating abstinence if there's a girl in front of you needing emergency contraception. It's a little late for a lecture.
Give her the Pill.