> I think everyone (including me) agrees that you shouldn't arrest or legally stop people from expressing their opinions
That simply isn't the case; definitely not "everyone".
> and we shouldn't call people 'heretics' for their ideas no matter what those ideas are
Indeed, those people are wrong; if you want to publicly call someone a heretic, or whatever, (in a non-harassing way), that's just your freedom of expression. You don't have to like the fact that someone thinks controlling women's bodies is a good idea, and may call them a backwards idiot or whatever.
> Boycotting people and businesses that hold views that go against your moral beliefs isn't wrong, and should not be condemned as blocking progress.
Right as far as a personal boycott goes; but now suppose you don't want to let such a person into your restaurant, or give them a job in spite of qualifications.
Also note that if you belong to some religion A, then people from a certain other religion B almost by the respective definitions of A and B hold views that go against your moral beliefs.
Obviously 'everyone' is an exaggeration; a vast majority, then.
You should not be able to keep a person out of your restaurant because of their views, but the job one is tricky and nuanced.
I think there are certain beliefs that a person could hold that are valid disqualifications for hiring that person; for example, if a person is advocating that women shouldn't be allowed to work and should stay at home because they have nothing of value to offer, how can I possibly hire that person? How is a woman supposed to work side by side with someone who has expressed the view that they have no value in the workplace? I think if your opinion is that some of your coworkers have no value in the workplace, that has to disqualify you to work there.
Now, of course, the spectrum of troubling views will eventually reach a point where the answer is not so obvious as to whether they should be hired or not. I don't think I have a strong answer to where that line should be.
A person who holds the views that you describe because he is an Orthodox Jew cannot be fired for said views. No, I'm not making that up. Perhaps you should think carefully about what "freedom of religion" means to you!
That simply isn't the case; definitely not "everyone".
> and we shouldn't call people 'heretics' for their ideas no matter what those ideas are
Indeed, those people are wrong; if you want to publicly call someone a heretic, or whatever, (in a non-harassing way), that's just your freedom of expression. You don't have to like the fact that someone thinks controlling women's bodies is a good idea, and may call them a backwards idiot or whatever.
> Boycotting people and businesses that hold views that go against your moral beliefs isn't wrong, and should not be condemned as blocking progress.
Right as far as a personal boycott goes; but now suppose you don't want to let such a person into your restaurant, or give them a job in spite of qualifications.
Also note that if you belong to some religion A, then people from a certain other religion B almost by the respective definitions of A and B hold views that go against your moral beliefs.