It was telling and informative (and disappointing although not unsurprising) that you appealed to ignorance of potential employees when they signed on to work for Hobby Lobby as a strike against Hobby Lobby’s policies. You did not word it this way, because you are smart enough not to say something like that so directly, but with your stance, you have no other alternative – and indeed no other reason to bring it up. The fact of the matter is it is the responsibility of the potential employee to learn what if any benefits are going to be offered before signing on to work for the company. That way there are no surprises later on.
It is fully the responsibility and fault of the employee, not the employer.
You also erroneously implied that Hobby Lobby is forcing employees to confide to (abide by?) religious outlines, by saying, “By working there, they never agreed to confide to religious outlines, and the corporation shouldn’t force them to.” While you are almost correct here, in that a corporation or other business should not be forcing its religious or antireligious ideology onto its employees and forcing them to abide by the same, in a better world they could if they desired and as long as they are open about this, then there is no cause for concern.
But Hobby Lobby is not forcing its employees to abide by any objectionable moral code, so that was another phrase full of emotionally- and politically-charged words, but devoid of anything resembling fact. Employees are not forbidden from purchasing the item themselves, but may do so with their own income. If Hobby Lobby were forcing its employees to abide by their religious ideals, then they would forbid its employees from making the purchase and would punish employees for doing so.
So Hobby Lobby is not forbidding its employees from getting access to contraception. It was objecting to being required to pay for it. So as I said, you have bought the progressive lie and I am not in error.
You are also being hypocritical by saying that Hobby Lobby must abide by your ideology. Hobby Lobby is not forcing its employees not to get access to these contraceptives, but you are perfectly fine with a third party forcing Hobby Lobby to give its employees the item. You can make whatever appeal you want, but that won’t change the hypocrisy of your position.
You also seem to be unaware of the biological difference between what a vasectomy does and what a contraceptive such as the morning-after pill accomplishes. A vasectomy prevents a male from releasing sperm in the future, thereby preventing fertilization from happening after the surgery is performed. It is before-the-fact. The morning-after pill however is after-the-fact. It may or may not prevent an already-fertilized cell from being implanted, which is why Hobby Lobby and others (including myself) oppose its use. The two are very different and cannot be compared in the manner you attempted.
But much of the above is largely irrelevant.
Why does an outside party get to tell an employer what goods and services (what benefits are) it must provide to its employees? Why is an employer not permitted to spend its money and use its resources to offer benefits it thinks are the best? Why is a business owner not allowed to operate their business in accordance with their beliefs? Why must a business owner be forced to pay for something it finds morally objectionable? (For that matter, why does it even need a reason beyond “because we don’t want to”?) What about religious liberty, property, and contract rights? Why are you and others so arrogant as to believe you have the right to tell them what to do with their money? You talked a lot about corporations, and you were talking about them as though they were people, or almost that. They are not, despite what the law may claim, but the people who own these businesses are without a doubt people.
And you would rob them of their property and contract rights, because their beliefs conflict with your own.