For those who are cynical about privacy, this case should provide food for thought.  If a banker is able to make these sorts of backroom, opaque and biased determinations about a customer on the basis of what's publicly known about them, then the possibility of discrimination is immensely greater if warped decision makers like this had access to private information too. 

The blatant prejudice in this case shows how important it can be to retain control over what others know about you.  It's a total misconception that "if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide".  The gay businessman did nothing wrong but evidently found himself on the receiving end of discrimination. 

In many many other cases, people need to control what's known about them, simply to protect themselves in the real world.