The shorter answer: it's complicated.

The short answer: somewhat progressive on women's rights, not so much on LGBTQIA+ rights.

The long answer:

Peoples Temple is a group where women could, and did, occupy leadership positions within the group. The group itself was progressive on women's rights issues, calling out misogyny and giving women leadership roles so that she was not solely confined to the home.

That being said, this widening of opportunities was confined to white women; black women as a group were generally not given the same opportunities to lead the group as white women were, especially attractive white women. This could be an indication of systematic racism within this otherwise-progressive-on-race group, as it is argued in the letter left by the Eight Revolutionaries when they defected back in 1973. In that same letter, the group of defectors accused the Planning Committee of being too focused on calling other people misogynists, and not enough on actual socialism, specifically black socialism.

In regards to LGBTQIA+ rights, that is more complicated. Jim Jones has, in numerous reports, claimed to be the only heterosexual in a world of homosexuals. It's been said that Jones did have sexual relations with men, and Jones did get arrested for exposing his genitals to an undercover vice officer in the men's restroom back in the mid-70s. I've yet to see any evidence so far that would suggest that Peoples Temple were progressive on that issue itself, although there is a book about LGBTQIA+ experience in the Temple (whose title I can't recall right now, and which I've not yet read). If anything, it promoted heternormativity within the group. Additionally, being for LGBTQIA+ rights would have likely alienated the majority congregation, many who were elderly women who were otherwise highly religious. As such, I hesitate to conclude that they were progressive with regards to LGBTQIA+.