Although I agree with you that there should not be a ban, your post does call for some response.

>>>That hideous list is a good example. Why is it that everytime something comes up that a group of people dislike, the first thing they want to do is demonize their opponents and pass legislation restricting our precious freedom? In my view, that is the only issue we should be debating.
>>>The fate of Slabbing should be left to the harsh reality of the free market.

That list is the harsh reality of the free market. That list does not call for a ban, that list is a statement that certain individuals have chosen to not accept slabbing for themselves. Isn't that what the market is all about.

>>>No real Libertarian would ever propose solving a problem by restricting individual freedom. That is the exact opposite of what the Libertarian philosophy is all about.

As a card carrying Libertarian, I must disagree. Although I do not support a ban, Jim Reilly's support of a ban is not un-Libertarian. Any real Libertarian would believe that a private voluntary organization such as the CC & GTCC can regulate itself however it sees fit. A Libertarian objects to Government intrusions on freedom, because Government imposes itself on others. Nobody has ever been forced to join the CC>CC, those who do not wish to accept a CC>CC policy can always leave the club.

Regarding the election. Although I disagree with Jim Reilly on this issue, I will be voting for in at election time. This is no disparagement of the other candidates as they will all make fine leaders of this club.

I simply do not believe that this should be a one issue election.