If any of you think this is a step in the right direction, ask yourself if companies should be able to choose whether your blood transfusions should be covered or whether you should have to eat the cost of a horrific, debilitating accident (some religions don't believe in medical intervention). What about if your company's religion doesn't approve HIV medications because they have a misguided idea that only gay people get it (as if sexual orientation is in any way relevant to people having the right to receive medicine) and you as a straight person had one night of an indiscretion from a partner who didn't disclose? What if your business' religious beliefs include only eating vegetarian and you suffer a heart attack from eating too many burgers and they won't cover it?
The court has opened a precedent so wide that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated in her dissent: "In a decision of startling breadth, the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs. The Court's determination that RFRA extends to for-profit corporations is bound to have untoward effects. Although the Court attempts to cabin its language to closely held corporations, its logic extends to corporations of any size, public or private."
This has far-reaching and awful repercussions that go far beyond the faith of an owner of one company. This is going to backfire in their faces horribly. Especially, if you help get out the word about how awful it truly is. You can also Like John Oliver on Facebook if you want to see more like this.