FW: A policy issue that is causing great upset

1,964 views
Skip to first unread message

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 1:37:28 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 5:37:19 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>
Subject: A policy issue that is causing great upset

First preface, I know twitter is not the real world but the eyes of the nation are on us.

 

Okay everyone, hate to start off with controversy, but I have had too many members ask me to bring this up that I believe I have to.  Ready?  Take a deep breath.

 

In the past, our nominee, Chase Oliver has said he believes that giving puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to gender-confused (I am not going to give this the death of a thousand qualifiers, use whatever terminology you want, and I do believe there are minors who will persist into adulthood to be trans) minors is healthcare  and simply up to parents and doctors.  Others argue, and I agree, that it is child abuse in violation of Platform Plank 1.5:

 

Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, provided that the rights of children to be free from abuse and neglect are also protected.

 

Absent some other certainly health-threatening disorder, arresting the normal natal development of a minor that will affect them the rest of their lives is abuse.  It is puberty itself that often resolves the confusion and thus it is stopping the normal progression.  Further, I have become convinced it has become a sort of conversion therapy for kids that would otherwise just turn out to be gay.

 

Because of the strong belief of some that this goes off platform in a way that harms the most vulnerable (yes every candidate, most notably Johnson/Weld in recent memory has gone off platform), some are calling for a suspension of nomination.  I am NOT suggesting that for as I pointed out to those member Bylaws Article 14.4 and .5 say:

 

The National Committee shall respect the vote of the delegates at nominating conventions and provide full support for the Party’s nominee for President and nominee for Vice-President as long as their campaigns are conducted in accordance with the platform of the Party.

 

A candidate's nomination may be suspended by a 3/4 vote of the entire membership of the National Committee at a meeting. That candidate's nomination shall then be declared null and void unless the suspended candidate appeals the suspension to the Judicial Committee within seven days of receipt of notification of suspension. The resolution of suspension must state the specific reasons for suspension and must be signed by each member of the National Committee agreeing thereto. The Judicial Committee shall meet and act on this appeal within 30 days and

before the election.

 

This means that any off-platform violations cannot be statements made before nomination but during the campaign and that is such a serious move in disregard of the delegates that I did not advocate that even for “bake the cake” and other patently anti-libertarian statements.  And I think a suspension would have to involve far more than that (particularly since the delegates were aware of this position and made their choice with that knowledge for the most part) but we WOULD have bylaws consent to counteract off platform messaging.  And I have been promised by the Oliver campaign that their focus will be anti-war. And I fear that will become even more necessary and his anti-war messaging is powerful.  In short, the delegates made their choice, and I personally believe that suspension is for really grievous offenses.  However, that doesn’t mean we have to nod and go along with things that are off-platform or are seriously injurious to the message of this Party (of which I know is a subjective judgment).

 

We already have the reputation of “but what if the child consents tho?” and I think we as leadership need clarity on this issue.  Do we believe this is simply a valid private choice between parents and a doctor or do we think it is abuse or somewhere in between.  Perhaps no statements to this effect will be made during the campaign, but I think we need to know where we, as the national party, stand.  I know where I personally stand.

 

What am I suggesting?  I honestly don’t know.  I have very strong feelings on this issue and I DO NOT believe this is simply some “choice” that parents can make for a minor that cannot consent.  I believe except in rare obviously medical cases that children have a right to go through their natal puberty and not be pumped full of hormones.  Our obscene USDA already allows enough of that in our food supply.  No it is not “reversible” - there is damage done.  How much and how extensive is up for debate.  And it prevents the very process that would help a young person make a decision.   I do not deny the existence of legitimate trans persons.  But that is an adult decision with full human development that has not been artificially arrested.  And if that adult, specifically MtF, decides they do wish to fully medical transition, their bodies will have gone through the necessary genital growth for best outcomes.  These procedures often sterilize minors at a time when they are not at all capable of even knowing what means and can rob them of sexual fulfillment later - these are basic human rights that normally we would find a tragedy if someone was denied them due to some accident, disease, or birth defect.

 

Yes I know that “but think of the children!”  is often an excuse for state intervention.  I am not suggesting we support state intervention (sorry to shock you but I am an anarchist), though I will note that our platform does say “are also protected” which implies a “protector.”  I am suggesting that we call abuse, abuse, no matter the good intentions.  I understand the slippery slope.  What about if a parent does X or Y.  I get it.  Honestly, this is a part of Libertarian theory that needs a lot more attention, and I favor the liability model.  There is nothing wrong with being gender stereotype non-conforming  How to deal with abuse is an issue that has many different variations depending on one’s view of libertopia, and even for most minarchists, the state is a blunt instrument of the worst kind.  And to anyone claiming this is a “right-wing” talking point, gay marriage/gay equality was a “left-wing” talking point for years, and we supported.  This isn’t about left or right; it is about non-aggression and real consent.  And I realize both left and right might have “unsavory” motivations for their ideas, such as some on the right now wanting government out of marriage just to keep gay people from getting married, that shouldn’t stop us from still supporting getting government out of marriage (which btw this Party has fallen flat on its face on ever since gay marriage was legalized by the Supreme Court - past LNCs fell strangely silent).

 

At a minimum I am suggesting a discussion, and certainly am strongly leaning towards a resolution around the idea of minors not being to consent to arresting their natal puberty and given cross-sex hormones, and absent some rare cases such as precocious puberty or other medical emergency where the clear medical benefits outweigh the risks, parental rights are not abuse rights.  And no I don’t buy into the guilt trips that are put on well meaning parents who really just want the best for their kids that their kids will commit suicide if not allowed to do this.  No matter how well meaning, parents do not “own” their children.  They are custodians of their rights until they can take full custodianship of themselves.

 

And if no one wishes to discuss or work on a resolution, okay, I have clearly stated my position.  I can look myself in the mirror. Full Libertarianism is for adults.  Full Stop.   It requires consent.  I am not looking for trouble but members (and some now former members unfortunately) are very upset.  And I understand why.  Children are precious and vulnerable and nothing raises instincts and anger more than a belief that children are being abused.   National silence can imply approval.

 

(as a point of reference we did out disclaimers and other refutations when Johnson/Weld went wildly off-platform)

 

I copied Mr. Vinson personally as he is not yet plugged into the LNC list.

 

I regret if this is viewed as pot-stirring, but it truly is not my intention.  My conscience is truly pricked and this is really tearing up our Party.  Yes, I know many things tear up our Party.

 

 

In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos

LNC Secretary and LP Historical Preservation Committee Chair ~ 561.523.2250

 

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 1:49:31 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 5:49:22 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I'm glad you brought this up,  Caryn Ann.

I am nowhere near advocating that we do anything to derail the candidates our delegates chose, but I agree with you that the LNC should discuss this.

I think Chase is very very wrong on this particular issue. Children cannot consent to such long-lasting and harmful "treatments" and parents who choose these for their children are (in the vast majority of instances) committing abuse on kids who would normally simply grow up to be gay.

For our party to stay silent on this issue would be tragic.

Adam Haman
Region 1 Rep, Libertarian National Committee
Vice Chair, Libertarian Party of Nevada
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 10:37 AM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 2:24:31 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 6:24:23 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

Thank you Adam.  I know that some will just think I am try to muckrake.  I am not.  A moment’s reflection should tell anyone that.  I know how to be wildly polemic and outrageous.  I took a day to write that to be sure it was measured, but my Libertarian conscience is truly pricked that many now think this is the position of the Party.  I know it is contentious to some, like abortion.  I am not playing a “who is a real Libertarian” test or trying to undermine our candidates or the will of the delegates, as I made clear.  But neither of those things require us to be silent where there is disagreement on such a grave topic, particularly if we believe it off-platform, and I firmly believe that this is covered under the very difficult balancing act of Plank 1.5.  Children have the right to fully develop absent extraordinary circumstances.  And there are those extraordinary circumstances which make state intervention such a blunt instrument.  But I don’t think standing up for the natural developmental rights of children is a “culture war” issue but a human rights issue.  Once a child is an adult, they may do as they please, including altering their body in any way they please, and I don’t believe we have any right as a Party to say a thing about those choices, whether we personally like them or not.  But basic human rights such as a right to have to meaningfully consent to something that has such potential horrific consequences to those who have other issues is something I cannot be silent on.  And I don’t think we are a Party should be either.    Libertarianism is for adults as Libertarianism requires CONSENT.   Children cannot consent to have their bodies so radically changed or their development halted.  I do not pretend this is not a tough issue.  It is.  And those claiming “oh but it is so small compared to others” – maybe it is, but it is the controversy blowing up right now, whether we like it or not.

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 3:00:15 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:00:04 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>
Subject: RE: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I’ve taken some time to carefully decide what to respond here, because I know regardless of what becomes of this discussion, many reading the list will weaponize even just the discussion itself.  That said, I’m firmly in the children can’t consent camp.  There are those who will agree, but then state that the parents are consenting on behalf of their child; and that they’re doing so in the best interest of the child.  I believe that while that may be the case in some instances, it’s still morally wrong and tantamount to child abuse.  That said, I think any serious discussion of weaponizing the bylaws to overturn the will of the delegates would be an extremely bad idea, but staying silent on this is also a bad idea. 

 

In Liberty,

 

Matt Johnson, PCM, CDMP

LNC Region 2 Alternate

Libertarian Party of Florida Director at Large 2

Libertarian Party of Florida Communications Chair

Libertarian Party of Volusia County Chair

Matt.J...@lp.org

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 3:41:11 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:40:59 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I'm not voting to overturn the will of the delegates nor am I voting to pass a resolution every time our nominee says something a portion of our Party disagrees with. It has been 3 whole days since we selected our ticket. Please let them do the work they were entrusted to do by the delegates at our National Convention. No one cares what the LNC thinks tbf. We've got a lot of work to do in the next 5 months, let's make sure our team is working towards the highest vote totals possible in November.

Dustin Nanna

Region 3 Representative, Libertarian National Committee

From: Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:00:04 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 3:46:54 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:46:44 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

Let’s give our candidates some time to breathe, it's only been a few days, and when the question comes up that is something the campaign will need to answer to. Let them get their policy advisors and opinions formed.

We have a lot to focus on as a board: goal setting, committee appointments, fundraising and membership programs, meeting staff, etc. 

Let’s focus on the basics and allow our Chair and media advisors to take care of position statements and messaging for now.

Sincerely,
Steven Nekhaila
At-Large Director

From: Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:40:59 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 3:52:50 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:52:38 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: RE: A policy issue that is causing great upset

Good Afternoon Committee Members,

 

I am with Steven on this one, although the stances do concern me, we ought to give the candidates an opportunity to correct the record if they see fit.

 

In Liberty,

 

Robert Vinson, Esq.

Libertarian National Committee Director At Large

Libertarian Party of Florida

Email: robert...@lp.org | Phone: 8505128538

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:12:12 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:12:01 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

No one has suggested overturning the will of the delegates- in fact my first post said the exact opposite.  I want that to be clear.

I also said that if all that happens is I said my position, so be 
From: Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 1:52:38 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:26:41 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:26:26 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

For those that don’t know me, I'm Paul Darr and I was a ward of the court from six years of age until I was emancipated from the system at eighteen. Being a ward of the court, I had every major decision in my life controlled by bureaucrats of the state. The same type of bureaucrats some are arguing should have the authority to override the decision made between a child, their parents, and physician. I can tell you from very personal experience that you don’t want to give the government one inch in determining how you and your family live their life.

As some have already stated here, we do recognize the age of majority for a reason, children can’t be expected to make life-changing decisions. That’s why parents act as guardians carefully weighing and making decisions for their children. When you appeal to the government to intervene, parental responsibility and guidance is obliterated. That’s when you get children kidnapped by CPS for parents religious beliefs or mandated jabs by vaccination they deem essential. All because the “government knows best.” 

It is critical here to not fall to the seductive appeal of mandating what we think is best for another through the coercive arm of government. We need to stand strong with parents and children. The government is not the parent of your child and parents have the right and responsibility to decide how their child receives medical care, education, and how they are cared for. We should remain consistent in our call for the government to keep their hand off our children. I far more trust the discernment of a loving parent for their child than the uncaring process of bureaucracy. 

Concerning the intimation that we should vacate our candidate based on supporting parental choice and responsibility, I find this to be a preposterous suggestion. The candidate has made a bold and consistent choice to support parental choice and responsibility over the government. In addition, his position is supported by the platform with 1.5 Parental Rights and 2.13 Health Care. All of us come to liberty from different points of view. We should not seek to overturn the will of the body when it is just a different point of liberty the candidate is representing and one the body was made well aware of by both detractors and supporters.

Respectfully,
 
Paul Darr, Region 3 Representative
Libertarian National Committee
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:12 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:30:14 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:30:03 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I will ask everyone once again to read my initial email

  1.  I actively opposed vacating our candidate.
  2. I opposed us supporting government intervention.

I am glad we are having the policy discussion but several times now it's been said things were said that not only were not said, but were explicitly spoken against.
From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:26:26 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:32:00 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:31:51 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

But responding to what people actually wrote is so boring…

Adam Haman
Region 1 Rep, Libertarian National Committee
Vice Chair, Libertarian Party of Nevada
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 1:30:03 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:42:19 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:42:07 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I was very very careful in what I wrote which has been appreciated by members.

Let's not start this term by trying to say people said or intimated things they did not.  Read my lips:  I neither said or intimated any of those two things.  The second is quite literally ludicrous considering I'm an anarchist and there's only one thing I want the state to do: cease to exist.

I do agree with Steven that some breathing room is wise.

I ended my statement with saying this is an issue in the Party and my duty is ultimately to the good of this Party.  If all that is accomplished is putting on the record my position, I'm satisfied.  I don't believe that position is in conformity with our platform.  I also didn't think bake the cake was and I never once suggested or intimated suspension.  The delegates knew that position too.

Medical freedom is an adult freedom just as sexual freedom is.  That's my position and that's where I stand.


From: Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:31:51 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:50:59 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:50:48 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

At the moment while we give our candidates time to breathe and correct the record (to which I am not opposed)—it is indeed old media, alternate media, social media, the membership that is doing all the talking. The Chase Oliver team understands this. Perhaps when or if the time comes to consider a resolution, we work closely with the campaign team to draft it.

Travis L. Bost
LNC At-Large
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 4:42 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 4:54:46 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:54:27 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I agree with you on that Travis.  I know the newer people do not know this but I was on a committee welcomed by the Johnson/Weld team to try to bring their positions more platform compliant.

I DID NOT go rushing to actively or intimate advocation of suspending them. I am NOT doing so here.
From: Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:50:48 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 7:30:09 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 11:29:57 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I am sorry if this issue is vexing some LP members, but it is not clear to me that Chase's position on this issue contradicts Plank 1.5 of the LP Platform. But, even if it did, so what? When has it been required of any LP candidate that that candidate be 100% in sync with the LP platform. Ron Paul was our Presidential nominee in 1988, and he disagreed with the LP platform statement on abortion at that time, which is at least as controversial issue as this. The Oliver/ter Maat ticket was duly nominated by the convention delegates and continues to deserve the full support of the Libertarian National Committee and the Libertarian Party. Bill Redpath
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:54 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 7:40:35 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 11:40:19 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

Bill, that doesn’t mean disagreement cannot be expressed.  Dr. Paul certainly was not on platform on abortion.  Johnson certainly was not on platform with discrimination law.  But our bylaws also say that we are free to disclaim any POSITIONS that are not on platform.  It may not be clear to you that IF (again nothing has been said yet in campaign, these statements are all older) it is against 1.5 (I clearly believe it is) that the Party/LNC or individual members of such cannot voice that.   I never suggested that we do not support our ticket.  Again, for now the third or fourth time I repeat, I said the opposite .  But I do not believe support means just being silent in disagreements. 

 

PS:  I have publicly stated that if Rectenwald were nominated I would be just as specific that he was not on platform when it comes to immigration.   And if Lars were nominated, I have made it clear that I think any kind of consumption tax is off platform (and the 2016 LNC put out a disclaimer on that specific position in an article it posted regarding Johnson).

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 30, 2024, 11:53:00 PMMay 30
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 3:52:49 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

All,

I have a lot of thoughts on this. Let’s take a beat until something official comes out from the campaign. 

I know it was only your intention to discuss CAH, and I appreciate that!
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 4:40:19 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 31, 2024, 12:14:12 AMMay 31
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: Angela McArdle <angela....@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 4:14:00 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>; Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

I see you've all been resting after convention 


Angela McArdle 
LNC Chair
From: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 10:52:49 PM

businesslist-forward

unread,
May 31, 2024, 12:14:54 AMMay 31
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
 
From: LP Secretary <secr...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 4:14:44 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>; Bill Redpath <bill.r...@lp.org>; Travis Bost <travi...@lp.org>; Adam Haman <adam....@lp.org>; Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>; Robert Vinson <robert...@lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin...@lp.org>; Matt Johnson <matt.j...@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu...@lp.org>; rws51103 <rws5...@gmail.com>; 4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb...@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: A policy issue that is causing great upset

Thank you Meredith that was my intention.  I am alarmed at the nuclear proportions some took my statement to when I literally went out of my way to soothe that concern.  Enough members trusted me enough to start the discussion.  So I did.

With the two prior examples given, the Party had a clear answer:  no, we don't agree with Dr. Paul on abortion.  No, we don't agree with Johnson on bake the cake.  I am asking if we have an answer here, that is all.  None of those two above answers were "intimated" to not support their campaigns.  I actively campaigned for Johnson.

Me personally, I have an answer.  And I'm permitted to do so.  As Bill said, no one is required to be 100% platform pure.  For years I disagreed on several things.  Those have been resolved.  This may be a new one.   So be it.  But we can't pretend this isn't all over the place right now.  It is.

Thank you for hearing me out.
From: Meredith Hays <meredi...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 9:52:49 PM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages