It's not a matter of excluding people who don't agree 100%. It's a matter of excluding people who don't buy into the core belief of libertarianism.
It is absolutely no different in any way from a church ex-communicating someone whose beliefs are contrary to theirs. The comments of those who defend inclusion of these people who advocate un-libertarian/pro-war stances are as laughable as someone saying... "I'm a big tent Christian. Why can't we have Satan worshipers in our congregation? How can we grow as a religion if we don't allow those who believe the exact opposite of us to be in our church? Some of us believe in Jesus, and some believe in Satan. We can't fault them just because they want to sacrifice human beings on an altar in our church. They believe in 99% of the other things right?" --- In [email protected], "Thomas L. Knapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quoth hrearden: > > > Do you believe that there should be such a provision? > > In response to: > > > There is no provision in the bylaws which would allow a member, or a > > set of members, to be "purged" from the party for being "pro-war." > > No -- at least not if the LP wants to be a political party. If it > wants to be something else, then it should be something else, instead > of pretending to be one thing while trying to be another. > > Political parties, in the kind of electoral system the US has, do not > succeed by rigorously excluding all who do not agree 100% with every > jot and tittle of the party platform. They succeed by rigorously > INcluding everyone who considers the party platform to be _most_ > representative, among the available choices, of proper policy goals. > > Tom Knapp > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
