Denying coverage or simply informing the government that you are not providing that coverage is important.
If I deny your request to pay for an abortion, and you go to Planned Parenthood, then that is not on me. I’ve done what I could do. It’s sad that money is fungible, and we realize that some of our tax dollars go to such an organization, but we’ve been trying to fix even that.
That is why it was a CATCH-22 situation Obama/Sebelius/Reid/Pelosi did this intentionally so that EWTN, Wheaton College, Little Sisters of the Poor, etc, can say they don't want to provide coverage, but their insurance company will regardless of whether the employer opts out or not.
LifeSiteNews.com had an article about this on EWTN:
Judge rules against EWTN in HHS mandate case
This was on June 19, 2014 before the Hobby Lobby Ruling.
The Judge, from the article states:
"EWTN doesn't have to comply with the mandate. All it has to do is sign a form certifying its opposition to the use of contraceptives and then deliver that form to its third-party administrator," she continued.
Further down in the article [Reporter Ben Johnson writes]:
The Obama administration's health care accommodation requires employers to certify their religious objections, but their insurance company must then offer female employees birth control pills for free. Critics say the move is nothing more than an accounting gimmick, but Judge Granade found the distinction compelling.
The article states that contraceptives that cause abortions must be offered...
So Obamacare, as originally legislated, must provide abortion-causing-pills...