You obviously must believe you know more that I do, however I never saw that in years past. I find it hard to be that a political party that could not even get one percent of the vote in a national election could be of any use to anyone for any agenda whatsoever. Effective? They can't get a dog catcher elected in almost every county in the nation.
I personally do not believe you know what you are talking about. Any individual that may have advocated for gay marriage and also stated that they are libertarian clearly does not speak for the whole political party or the movement any more than a gay Republican speaks for all Republicans.
I am not for gay marriage, nor any number of LP platform issues, yet identify strongly with the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC).
Specifically, the RLC favors reduced government intrusion, lower taxes, elimination of federal agencies, less regulation, a strong national defense with fewer military bases abroad, and no foreign aid.
LOL, if that were just that, then you would just be a conservative.
BUT! You didn't mention that your second sentence is QUOTED from wikipedia, you also left out THE SENTENCE following it in wikipedia.
"In 2010, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas denounced the new state Republican Party platform that supported criminalization of sodomy and making same-sex marriage a felony."