The decision was wrong and shouldn't be an excuse for coerced humiliation or maybe you believe we should mindlessly accept all court-spewed abominations.
The fact that the case was accepted for an en banc review, which is discretionary on the part of the Court and not an automatic right, suggests that the full court found some troubling issues in the 3 judge panel decision. It should be noted that the decision was not unanimous. In addition to the 2 judge decision, there is, as part of the decision, the heroic 1 judge dissent, which takes a different view of the matter and might have formed the basis for the Court granting an en banc rehearing.
Nope, you're wrong.