Controversial birth-control pill measure passes Assembly

Kirsten Searer

Friday, May 27, 2005 | 9:32 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The Assembly approved a controversial amendment to a bill Thursday that would require pharmacists to fill prescriptions for birth control pills and morning after pills despite moral objections.

Senate Bill 163 was originally intended to add regulations to boards that issue occupational licenses.

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, argued in favor of the amendment, saying pharmacists are not doctors, and should not have the right to judge the decision that patients and their doctors make about birth control methods.

"A pharmacist is hired to dispense, and therefore it is their duty to dispense," she said.

Fifteen Republicans in the Assembly, plus Democrat Mo Denis of Las Vegas -- a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is opposed to abortion, voted against the amendment. Las Vegas Republican Chad Christensen was absent from the vote.

"When a pharmacist would refuse to fill a prescription because it violated tenants of his faith, I think we have to give him that right under our constitution according to freedom of speech and freedom of religion,' said Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, R-Reno.

The amendment likely will face opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate, where Sen. Maurice Washington, R-Sparks, said he thinks pharmacists should be able to refuse to fill prescriptions if they feel ethically obligated.

Both the Senate and the Assembly moved quickly on bills Thursday. They must pass all bills that do not have a fiscal impact by the end of the day today, or the measures will die.