EHarmony settled to get out of the lawsuit and take a business perspective to offer a site that caters to homosexuals. They were not ordered by the court, nor were they forced to do so. They offered it up as a settlement agreement that allowed them to make money. The fact is, if they wanted to ignore it I am pretty sure the legal argument for forcing to recognize sexual orientation as a civil right does not exist- yet.
I understand that. That's why I said they settled. I disagree with your claim that recognizing sexual orientation would not be considered a civil right. The Supreme Court has consistently denied certiorari on the issue for years, but most legal scholars would agree that it would probably be recognized as a civil right like race, ethnicity, national origin, or sex. Currently, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation receives intermediate scrutiny from the courts.
If you're curious, read
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). This case found a law banning sexual acts between two consenting adults of the same sex was unconstitutional.
Also, this article is a good read on the possibility that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation will receive strict scrutiny in the future
http://onthedocketgtown.blogspot.com/2007/10/strict-scrutiny-for-lgbtq.html
That's probably way too much information. I'm in law school and took a course on Constitutional Law, so I find this stuff fascinating.