The Right To Be Wrong

John Delin is facing a disciplinary "court of love." We know he's famous for his support of Ordain Women and LGBT issues, gay marriage being the largest of those. His ideas are counter to church teachings on these issues and his unapologetic support for issues the church teaches against is likely why he's facing the "court of love."
But since when are we to be punished by anyone other than God for being wrong about doctrine, scriptural interpretation, or the ways in which we navigate through our lives? Do we have the right to be wrong?
I believe we do.
"Regardless of your circumstances, your personal history, or the strength of your testimony, there is room for you in this church."  - President Uchtdorf
If the above quote is true doesn't that mean we have a church that has a wide enough tent to encompass different interpretations of doctrine and scripture?
There was a man who wrote a book about his take on the book of revelation which contradicted church teachings at the time. Joseph Smith was away when the author was excommunicated, but this is what Joseph Smith said about that issue: 
"I never thought it was right to call up a man and try him because he erred in doctrine, it looks too much like methodism and not like Latter day Saintism. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be kicked out of their church. I want the liberty of believing as I please, it feels so good not to be tramelled. It dont prove that a man is not a good man, because he errs in doctrine." Joseph Smith
If this was true then why is it not true now? The cases may be different and we may not know all the details since, for its part, the church will not speak publicly about it. Details are crucial in deciding whether this comparison works at all. But if we err in doctrine does that mean we must be asked to leave the church and not come back until we can fall in line and March forward like good little soldiers?
The church Joseph Smith described in the above quote does not look like the one we have. It seems as if our church cannot tolerate those who believe differently than the leaders would have us believe. 
But if one feels that the church is wrong on however many issues, why would one want to stay? That can only be answered individually. Many just want their positions understood and respected. Even if, God forbid, they are different.
Jacob wrestled with an angel. This is seen by many as wrestling with God. The idea is that to come to terms with God one must struggle with Him. One must do the heavy lifting to find their place in the Kingdom. And this is a normal and I think an eternal process.
Everyone thinking the same and living the same way is an idea that has been rampant in just about every culture but that is an ideal never reached because it is human nature to be different and unique.
I agree with the church on some issues but disagree on others. I dislike the implication that I need to fall in line or be asked to leave. I want to be a member of a church that welcomes me despite my differences. And so far it has. 
So far the bishop and stake president are glad to see me at church. They know I blog but haven't raise any issues as of yet. But that may be my ward or it may be the church as a whole. I'm not sure which. At a stake conference my stake president quoted my blog verbatim them disagreed with it but he has yet to call me to the carpet for believing differently. Simply agreeing to disagree is healthier than punishing those who think or believe differently.
Every church or institution has the right to decide who it accepts as members. But that Joseph Smith quote and the one by Uchtdorf speak of a church that is much more open and accepting of differences than it seems our current church is.
I don't mean to attack the church. I'm just asking if we have the right to be wrong, if we have the right to not be trammeled. I'm asking if it's true that it doesn't prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.
Part of why this disturbs me is the idea of either thinking and believing as everyone else or being ostracized. 
And for what it's worth here is a good example of why we may have been created with such inherent differences:
"And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ." Quran 5:48
I think this is a better and healthier way of looking at differences. That they are meant to be. That how we respond to different people or races or genders and especially ideas says more about us than it does about what we react to.
If we truly love one another as Christ loved us we ought to be able to accept and respect different views and ideas and people. This does not mean one must agree with or even like those differences but if we can love our enemies we ought to be able to handle the differences of our brothers and sisters.