If a company adheres to the SCOTUS ruling (as Fuzz was massively correct on in post #16) and says, basically, that vasectomies are an abhorrence to their personally held religious views: then go work somewhere else.
If you don't like that a company doesn't have an EBP: go work somewhere else.
Thus, you now truly know the scheme of liberty.
We don't need Obamacare, but we don't need the SCOTUS ruling either. The law of the land should be: if you don't like it, go work somewhere else.
Obozocare or any other mandatory governmental scheme forcing private employers to fund government priorities in medical insurance is an abomination. Hacking chunks off the monster is certainly not objectionable from an actual laissez-faire POV. If an employer morally objects to paying for the murder of innocent babies, let SCOTUS interfere and put a stop to it. IUDs, morning after pills, or any other abortifacient or artificial birth control or sterilizations of any sort, or viagra, or "gender reassignment surgeries," or most psychiatric nonsense, or any other similar allegedly medical hobby scheme: megadittoes. Heart, lung, liver transplants and the like, likewise. Those are easy since defunding those would conform to my morality. I normally have no objection to blood transfusions in the absence of the upcoming college-based "gay" national blood drive day. Jehovah Witnesses do. They should not have to pay for what they regard as an abomination (with some Scriptural foundation). Christian Science devotees have far wider moral objections to medicine. As employers, they ought not to be coerced into paying for what they regard as morally abhorrent.
Eventually, we may be left with agnostic or atheist employers of a libertarian bent who, based upon the questionable "virtue of selfishness" creed of serial adulteress and social anarchist Ayn Rand, "morally" object to being taxed at all or required to provide anything for others, much less Obozocare. I would gladly relieve them of the entire burden of Obozocare by having it repealed altogether for them and for everyone else, at least as a mandatory program and not privately negotiated benefits.
One other probably unintentional problem with your post is that you say: "if you don't like that a company will not provide birth control options...." I think it more accurate to say that a company may not PAY for an employee's birth control or babykilling or sex change operation or whatever. The employer is normally not the medical provider. If Sandra Fluke has a problem with this in her dwindling career in fertility, she can pay for her own birth control, abortions or whatever she may deem necessary even if she feels an inner need to become Alexander by surgical means.
If liberals were not forever piling idiotic liberal agendas onto every breath we take, life would be a LOT less expensive. Long before Obozocare, I suffered the shame of having Rosa DeLauro as my Congressthing. She was hot as a summer day in hell to make psychiatric nonsense a mandatory part of each and every medical policy in the land. Given time, rank idiots like DeLauro (the Demonrat Assistant Whip and Marxist jackass extraordinaire) would probably want to make plastic surgery, facial makeovers and whole body transplants mandatory in each policy. In her case, of course, that would be special interest legislation but we are expected to be gentlemen and not notice that.
The simple answer is an honest disclosure by the employer of just what the employer is voluntarily willing to provide or of what has been negotiated between employer and employee(s) followed by decision by the employee as to whether to work for the employer or move on.
Without making anything mandatory, it might be better to construct medical insurance policies from the ground up. Include the normal run of maladies to which we, as humans, are likely to be subject if we live long enough: cardiovascular disease, cancer, stroke, kidney failure, and the like. Want an AIDS rider in case one's social habits may place one at a higher than normal risk? Want coverage for lung cancer just in case your five pack a day habit was a physical as well as fiscal disaster? Abortion coverage, sterilization coverage, cirrhosis of the liver coverage arising from alcohol abuse, new medical frontiers where no man or woman has gone before (guinea pig coverage), etc. If your employer objects to providing such coverage, you are on your own!
That way, the US is a more free country than it otherwise would be and medical insurance will be a lot MORE affordable for responsible folks and a bit more expensive for those determined to be among the rest.
Also, medical savings accounts, anyone? Make deposits tax free and medical expenditures including preventative care, likewise. If you die before you spend it, it pass tax free to your designate heirs or those who are heirs at law if you have no last will and testament.
I have known the scheme of liberty all along but it certainly embraces the Hobby Lobby decision until we can get rid of Obozocare altogether. (And not replace it with the also despicable tyranny of Romneycare or Christiecare or Jebbiecare or Fauxcahontascare or Hildebeastcare or anyone else care).