There seems quite a bit of confusion regarding the Hobby Lobby ruling on the distinction between a public company and a private family business, and also judicial review. Hobby Lobby is not a public corporation; it is privately owned. Hence, the owner's rights are the same as any citizen's.
Another aspect in need of clarification is that an ordinary piece of legislation, like Obamacare, is not higher than the laws in the Constitution. The Bill of Rights trumps any perceived "right" in ordinary legislation. Legislation is supposed to be vetted for constitutionality, but when Congress and the president don't do that properly, the legislation may end up in court for judicial review.
One recent letter stated: "It looks like religious freedom trumps individual freedom." Yes, it does in situations like this where a piece of legislation tries to force a private citizen to violate religious beliefs guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. The judicial review caught that flaw in this legislation that runs afoul of religious freedom (freedom of conscience), and affirmed a private business does not have to cover abortion inducing items and procedures.
Another letter asked if businesses that use this religious exemption should post their status. They probably should. That way, when a person decides to apply for a job, the HR department can tell them up front that their health plan does not cover methods of abortion. That cost is on you.
What remains confusing is how some think that employers, insurance or taxpayers should cover abortions. Perhaps this is some "enlightenment thinking" mutation lingering from the French Revolution? Who knows, but reason would say those who cause a pregnancy should cover abortion costs. Those who have demanded "choice" in the matter might live up to that philosophy and take responsibility for that choice.