In the comments of that post there is a VERY interesting take on the problem, which I'm going to paraphrase/rephrase/edit quite a bit here:
The "call of conscious" usually means that the person who objects makes a sacrifice. However, in the case of the pharmacist refusing to sell legal medication to a woman of age he is making another person sacrifice.I attempted to keep the gist of the argument clear, but please refer back to the original comment if you have doubts that I managed to do so.
The idea of doing what is morally right requires sacrifice and courage on the part of the person standing up for what he/she believes in. But refusing to give out a medication forces a different person, in need of the medication, to sacrifice and suffer.
Determining the course of another person's life IS NOT a moral choice, it is domination and control. If these pharmacists want to actually do something moral, then they need to leave their profession in protest.
Sacrifice for conscience is okay, but don't think that controlling others IS sacrifice. It's not. It's sadism.