Well, no. Their religion makes them reject blood transfusions (if I understand it correctly). It doesn’t mean that they think you can’t or shouldn’t have a blood transfusion yourself.
That wouldn’t prevent you from having a blood transfusion, they would just refuse to pay for it under their health insurance plan.
I was talking about someone who wasn’t;t a JW, worked for a company owned by JW’s, and the company did not want to pay for any blood transfusions, and did not want them covered under company EBP’s. They could say that while it is a medical necessity, the person can pay for it out of pocket or the gov’t can pay the tab, and thus the medical necessity would be taken care of, and religious liberty protected simultaneously.
The media has failed to mention a passage in Justice Alito’s ruling that although Hobby Lobby doesn’t have to pay for drugs they oppose on religious grounds, the insurance company DOES so all employees have access to all 20 drugs, including those that produce abortions. This would be true of Jehovah Witness owners or any other sincere religious objection.
Here’s the exact comment from Justice Alito’s majority opinion:
“The effect of the HHS-created accommodation on the women employed by Hobby Lobby and the other companies involved in these cases would be precisely zero. Under that accommodation, these women would still be entitled to all FDA-approved contraceptives without cost sharing.”
This refers to an exception created by the Department of Health and Human Services that forces insurers to pick up the tab for coverage objected to by religious non-profit organizations and churches.
Women employed by these organizations receive the same coverage, medications, and cost-free contraceptives as everyone else as mandated by HHS, even though the organizations themselves refuse to pay for that coverage.