He has the freedom to do what he wants. And others have the freedom to judge him for doing so.
Going against the grain has, and will always be a dangerous proposition and no amount of thought policing will change that.
Going against the grain has, and will always be a dangerous proposition and no amount of thought policing will change that.
Being gay is far more dangerous than being straight.
Being Muslim in a majority Christian or Hindu society is far more dangerous than being a adherent of the prevailing religion.
We could list examples all day, but it's a plainly obvious phenomenon. What I want to know is why so many people seem to act as if there's inherent moral superiority in being in the majority. There isn't.
(Also, cute bit of doublespeak characterizing a challenge to orthodoxy as "thought policing".)