This was actually my point last time I wrote about it:
One of the greatest criticisms pharmacists face is the ranging of homeopathic products in pharmacies. It is difficult to deny that ranging homeopathic products provides a level of legitimacy to these products that they do not deserve.
Conclusive evidence now exists that homeopathy does not work. This is different from a lack of evidence for an effect; this is specific evidence that shows that this modality cannot and does not provide any of the purported benefits or mechanisms of action.
This evidence for lack of effect is important, due to the ethical responsibilities of pharmacists to provide evidence-based medicine
— Jarrod McMaugh, “Clinical tips: Non-evidence-based medicine“, referenced here
Homeopathy does not work. By selling homeopathic products pharmacies show that they are willing to sell products that do not work. Why should you then trust a pharmacist?
See also Edzard Ernst’s “German pharmacists fail their customers when advising them on homeopathy“, and his summary on a vote a couple of days ago at the 78th FIP World Congress of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, where
[…] two thirds voted for the motion and against homeopathic products remaining on sale in pharmacies. The vote has, however, no binding effect on FIP policy. It is nevertheless likely to determine the direction in which FIP will decide.
— Edzard Ernst, ““Pharmacists should not sell or dispense homeopathic products”“