Jehovah Witnesses are against blood tranfusions. Should any employer who is a Jehovah Witness be able to deny?

I get the whole political parallel you're trying to make here, but realistically, Jehovah's Witnesses wouldn't involve themselves in such controversies. We live in accord with the scriptures and don't attempt to force others to live by our standards. We're happy to discuss our Bible-based reasons with our neighbors, but we don't try to legislate our beliefs. In fact, we have a rich history of fighting in the courts for religious and conscientious freedom around the world. An article in USA Today said, "Before you shut the door on a Jehovah’s Witness, pause to consider the shameful persecution they suffered not too long ago, as well as the rich contribution they have made to the First Amendment freedoms we all enjoy. . . . So frequently did Witnesses raise core First Amendment issues that Justice Harlan Fiske Stone wrote, ‘The Jehovah’s Witnesses ought to have an endowment in view of the aid which they give in solving the legal problems of civil liberties.’”

The Dr.'s even learned a thing or two about blood transfusions from Jehovah's Witnesses. Whenever possible they use a different substance other than blood. My cousin got a transfusion when she was 49 years old. She never had a pimple in her life. After the transfusion her face was full of pimples and she would get blisters throughout her body. Another person a knew, got HI V after a blood transfusion.I think listening to the Bible is a good thing.

According to the Blunt and Rubio amendments, yes.

As an employer "what do I owe my employees"? What we agreed upon when I hired them. If i am willing to pay X and only X if they do not like it the employee can go somewhere else to work. There are no slaves As an Employee I have the right to work for the employer that will provide me with what I need or desire. This is freedom, the freedom of choice. If you do not like the benefits the employer provide quit and go to work for some one else.

Let's think about it a minute: Blood transfusions vs contraception. Which one can save lives, and which one is so you don't have to take any personal responsibility for your actions? I don't see how comparing blood transfusions to contraception is a valid argument.

No. They have freedom of religion, not freedom over others religions. Generally the insurance company determines coverage. An employer does not get to pick & choose illnesses & procedures for coverage. Thst would be a complete nightmare for insurance providers.

Employers already have the right to deny HC coverage. an no employer gets to decide what procedures are covered under a HC plan to may offer.