There are plenty of folk who think otherwise, and are leaping on the ruling as a basis for companies being able to discriminate against gays in hiring, firing, or as customers. After all, if it's all about the sincerely-held religious beliefs of the owners of "close-held family owned" corporations, why stop at allowing someone to opt out of covering certain forms of birth control that they (mistakenly) think are abortifacients?
The majority opinion did specifically note that they didn't think the ruling would apply to claims to be able to discriminate on the basis of race, but didn't mention other protected or semi-protected categories, including sexual orientation, or even sex. Which opens up even more cans of worms, as Justice Ginsberg suggested.
Embedded Link
Anti-Gay Activists Hopeful Hobby Lobby Will Lead To License To Discriminate
Anti-gay activists are rejoicing at the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby today, in part because they are hopeful that the decision will pave the way for one of their own policy goals: to us