Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Spotted at Walgreens: American Exceptionalism
I saw this sign at my local Walgreen’s and I have to admit my first reaction was irritation.
Not because the company offers a menu of languages with which to interact with its customers. On the contrary, I think that’s probably smart business. Good for them.
No, it’s the words, “It’s your right.”
Is it? Is it really your “right” to come to a country and insist that your pharmacist speak Hmong? Or Russian or Persian or Armenian?
(I’m ignoring, for the moment, that the list of languages it’s “your right” to use when speaking to your pharmacist includes Arabic.)
I travel a lot. And I’ve been to some really way-out places. And as a result of my compulsion to eat everything in sight, I’ve also spent a fair amount of time gesturing and pointing and making humiliating charades in pharmacies worldwide. No one ever told me, anywhere, anyplace, anyhow, that it was “my right” to speak English to the pharmacist.
Published in General
Not on the large scale of “rights,” but on the small scale of pharmacists are dealing with dangerous substances, I do think it important for the instructions for prescription use and warnings to be very clear to people.
Est-ce que c’est aussi mon droit de poster ici en français? Non? Quel dommage!
Ah, but the difference there that Canada’s constitution specifically makes French an official language, requiring bilingualism in all aspects of the federal government (as well as the government of New Brunswick, but not the other provinces).
It’s a specific constitutional requirement imposed upon the governments of Canada and New Brunswick, not a “right” that some of the people can impose on the rest of the people.
If the California Board of Pharmacy believes that it should have the power to impose similar requirements on private businesses regarding all minority languages, it’s certainly free to lobby for an amendment to the US Constitution.
(Also, Canada is about 500 miles from California. Futhermore, official bilingualism didn’t become a thing until the constitution was amended in 1982, long after the US passed the Civil Rights Act 1964. We got the virus from you guys. ;-)
Hey, I am second to no one on this site for complaining about waste of government money on stupid “feel good” projects. But, this is California. What are you going to do? Move to New York for a year in protest? Getting all worked up about it seems a waste of time. I say roll with it. Learn Farsi and do all your medicine shopping through translator services, it’s your right after all.
< devil’s advocate mode = on >
Well, not quite. There are rights not spelled out in the Constitution, and the Constitution spells out that they are to be left to the States to figure out.
< devil’s advocate mode = off >
Oh, I see Arahant made the same point. Carry on…
The only part I can ever seem to find on over the counter medicine are the warnings.
I have to look REALLY hard for the proper dosage, the only thing I care about.
Again, it’s not Walgreens. It’s the Government of California.
Indeed, that is a “good”, and it may be so beneficial that governments can make it a legal requirement for pharmacies if those governments choose.
That is a far cry from being a “right”.
There are so many languages on that list. It must be hard to find the one you need.
Luckily they’ve labeled them for easy searching.
Well, remember that this is a California law. Presumably if this was a Maine or Louisiana law French would have been included.
If the California Board of Pharmacy has the power to bestow rights on the people of California as it pleases, surely it also has the power to limit those rights as it pleases.
The international gesture for Viagra is to start with your palms together, then spread them apart. (Try it now. We’ll wait.)
What more, really, do you need?
Governments don’t hate people. Corporations do.
Duh!
You are right (haha). Hasn’t it been said the Constitution is more about negative rights or what the government can’t make you do or them do to you? I think we are all in agreement on this. The Feds have gotten way too involved in our lives and O-care is the last piece to get even more involved.
Aaron:
“This might not be the hill to die on, but I object to the general notion that citizens are duty-bound to honor any and every crackpot idea politicians legislate in Washington or more locally.”
I totally agree with you, but the example Rob gave and in the case of the hospital, these are businesses that if they don’t comply there are consequences. The way it should work is if the business wants to provide this service for it’s customers then ok. It shouldn’t be mandated. I don’t even want to get into the cost of these language line services and the joke that is.
If I may skip off topic for a moment – I think we ought to give real kudos to the design artist on this one. The Excel is almost invisible.
I do not believe that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 included language rights.
Wikipedia doesn’t mention it, anyways.
Hey now, you can do tables in Word as well!
;-)
Quite. Where’s the Anglo-Saxon entry on the poster for those of us who are not so up on the modern lingo?
It’s California, not Massachusetts!
;-)
See my link. Unfortunately, the Civil Rights Act has been used to further a lot of progressive agenda items.
Governments are a form of corporation, not a commercial corporation, but still a corporation.
No argument from me there, but still, just because the Government of North Carolina says that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes language rights, that doesn’t make it so.
When you want to say “I speak Conservative!” Remember! It’s Your Right to Play with Excel and Google Translate!
If the names of the languages weren’t printed in English, how would the pharmacist know which interpreter to call?
Some years ago I remember reading a piece wherein the author did not like the idea of a melting pot. Rather, she said, it should be like a salad as that way all the ingredients would retain their distinct characteristics – including language. This, said she, would be what we should celebrate.
No thank you! For so many reasons.
Be sure to use your middle finger…
I could support this position, with two caveats.
1) Define “we”. The community? The city? The state? The country? The planet?
2) There’s a big difference between “should” and “must”.
I have no problem with celebrating other cultures and other languages. I have a big problem with being legally required to do so.
Actually, not a bad idea. Not Persian, of course, but does anyone know if there’s a market for Hmong sitcoms?
If they don’t know, then they’re a pharmaracist.
So long as they don’t have punny names like “They Live Hmong Us”
Judging by your attention to text alignment, I’m guessing that you have experience with these multicultural legalisms.