The article you linked said that because bitcoin is virtual it should not be considered money.
Nope. Not at all. I imagine the problem here is you're seeking to confirm your notion of what the argument is rather than diligently, freely reading. That latter is absolutely required in order to understand more advanced topics (of which this is certainly one, and developing said understanding may take some time).
I read the entire article and found the arguments weak at best. I dont think we are on the same page or at least im not. What is it exactly you are trying to say?
I just want to know why a company like e-trade couldn't begin accepting bitcoin as a payment option legally.