Exactly. And Gary Johnson is pro-choice. The conclusion being abortion politics has no place in the Libertarian Party, or in federal law.
Now compare to a social liberal, who believes abortion should be legal from conception to birth (or in the case of Obama, post-birth), and that it should be funded by the taxpayer.
The simple fact is Robert Sarvis, who could not espouse one libertarian thought other than drug legalization, should never have been accepted by the Libertarian Party, and the Libertarians Party damaged itself by running him as their candidate.
That isn’t true.
Sarvis was pure libertarian on drugs, abortion and the homosexual issues, and we have to assume, many other libertarian issues, that is why he was so successful with his fellow libertarians.
Well said.
The disagreements on libertarians should dissipate with the very basic understanding that libertarianism is essentially in opposition to statism, and it’s liberalism that is at odds with conservatism. These differences are supported by definitions.
Unfortunately, we have FRiends that insist on conflating the idiotic Libertarian Party platform with the clinical, non-moral principles of libertarianism. The mindless effort is counterproductive to the conservative cause.
I’ve said that one isn’t a libertarian alone. Assuming the individual is not an android, he must have some moral compass that either points towards liberalism or conservatism. The same can be said for the statist. The liberal leaning statist is the Leftist; the depraved control-freak that we see in the Marxists destroying the Country.
The Libertarian Party is largely operated and populated by liberals. No self-respecting libertarian should be part of it.