Initially testing the waters for a topic a group (be it a political ideology, etc.) wants to be open-minded about against mass public sentiment due to the principles they stand behind, only to back-track dramatically once they get called all the usual names with the usual accusations, is all-too common during a moral panic. And this particular moral panic has a lot of emotional steam behind it.

Once they find their courage and principles sorely tested to that degree over a topic which is so emotionally volatile, they suddenly decide it's not worth it anymore so they make an "exception" to their principles, thus causing the entire framework to become a proverbial house of cards.

They count on the strength of the emotional sentiment behind the attitude to shield them from the obvious contradictions and hypocrisy considering their own principles. The end result is that the strength of the group becomes weaker overall, rather than stronger. Pragmatism has a place in this world, but there are ways to go about it without compromising your values and principles to avoid being called names.