RE: LP Delegates: VOTE to Retain Women's Right Plank

Pro-choice Libertarians:

I really do agree with our Presidential candidates that, on any issue where
conscientious Libertarians can come down on either side, the best approach
is to allow the marketplace of ideas work via "states rights". All those
who consider a fetus to be alive can move to states that restrict abortion,
and all those who consider a fetus to be nothing more than an appendage of
the mother can move to states that have no such restrictions. Both sides
claim that allowing the other side to "win" would be disastrous for society,
so let's test that hypothesis. If Alabama soars while California rots, then
the pro-lifers were right, and if Texas crumbles while New York prospers,
then the pro-choicers were right. This is the Libertarian approach to world
government (until the Communists try to invade us, let's just leave them
alone and watch them self-destruct), and I believe that this is the least
force-initiating path we can possibly take with the abortion debate.

As a gay man actively promoting marriage equality in California, where I
currently live, and in Massachusetts, where I will move this fall, I have no
problem with the idea of "states rights". I would actively oppose a
Constitutional amendment stating that "marriage shall be defined as the
union of any two consenting adults", even though such an amendment would
make it possible for my partner and me to live more comfortably in any state
in the union. Sure, it's more convenient for one to use the overwhelming
force of the federal government to push one's agenda, but it's also
incredibly convenient for one's opponents to use that same force in return.
I'm really dismayed that so-called "Big L" Libertarians would so openly
deride the concept of federalism. States rights exist as a VITAL check on
the power of the federal government, and all Libertarians should recognize
that as a GOOD thing.

Though I don't plan to vote down the women's rights plank, I have to say
that reading an email tearing down all three of our presidential candidates
in one swipe makes me want to second-guess anything being proposed by
"Pro-Choice Libertarians". We should be supporting all three of these guys,
because any of them would be an order of magnitude better than the other
parties' candidates. And I'm positive that I'm not the only person who
feels that way. You seriously may have hurt your cause with this spam.
Please remove me from your mailing list.


If you would talk about self-determining COMMUNITIES instead of state imposed geographical entities in the U.S. called "states" I would agree with you. CM

Rob Power wrote: