Unless they're gay, in which case he'll happily vote against them having the same rights as everyone else...
The Trouble we now have in the West is that equality and Tolerance is now all to often equated with you agree with and or support, to express any other position is portrayed as bigotry.
Its a false equivalence and the trouble is poor legislation aimed at equality is effectively enforcing this.
Its all well and good giving group A the right to X but what about group Bs rights.
Whilst preaching tolerance and equality - we are creating a system which has absolutely no tolerance for any one who dares have an opinion not currently in vogue.
As to JRM
He opposes Gay marriage, abortion and the death penalty as a result of his religious beliefs - They are his opinions - he is entitled to them, and people are entitled to challenge them.
The usual suspects screaming Homophobe at him** - isn't doing that.
I dont agree with Mr Mogg - but I do believe that a tolerant society should allow people to have and express opinions that the moral majority dont agree with - I also believe that tolerance should be extended to peoples religious beliefs (and not just some religions).
Ergo no religious institution should be compelled to marry a gay couple, at the same time a deeply religious family run BnB shouldn't be compelled to accept unmarried straight or gay couples, an opinion I share with Mr Tatchell. At present they are entitled to refuse the former but not the latter, ( effectively Gays have more rights than straight people on this issue)- which is the problem with the whole equal rights legislation - trying to work out whose rights trumps whose. Do my rights to worship and my beliefs trump those of a Gay couple - which of course depends on religion*** - Im yet to see anyone challenging Muslim Imams, businesses, Mosques and politicians for expressing the same views as Christian ones. (For the record all religion can go hang itself in my opinion)
The intolerance and denigration of those who dont agree with something may well see far more support for Mr Mogg in the future - Not because they agree with him - but because this nasty insidious intolerant culture is affecting more and more people, because the demands are getting more extreme and the possibility of avoiding giving offence more and more difficult.
Peter Tatchell, Germaine greer , and other leading rights activists have all been labelled as bigots and stopped from speaking - because they havent endorsed the latest fashionable course or worse in Tatchells case not because he did or said anything offensive but because he spoke out against censorship.
**Whilst of course ignoring the large number of Labour MPs with similar religious beliefs
***I dont claim that's a fact of law - but it does reflect the approach and actions of the activists and perhaps how keen people are to apply the law.
Edit - For clarity - I quoted you and the point - Other than the bit in blue the response isn't to you - its more general
Just in case thanks to poor grammar or use of words - it appears I'm calling you an intolerant activist - Im not and wouldn't -