You want an example of how this might energize people, simply look at the Ron Paul campaign.

The key components of limited government are, for example, treasury (printing of money, etc.), defense, justice system, etc. The justice system has a responsible for protecting life through it’s branches of law enforcement. That’s where conservatism says government should step in –when killing is happening. Just like if someone tried to come in and murder you, or if you saw someone trying to murder someone else you would call the police and you would expect/demand the government to stop the murder/killing.

Same concept with abortion. Abortion stops a beating human heart so sure expect the government to protect that person just like you’d expect to be protected. Fortunately for you, your mother did not want to kill you.

If the Republican Party abandons its pro-life plank, I think it condemns itself to the ash heap of history. If neither the Republican nor the Libertarian Party are willing to defend innocent life, then I might as well join the Libertarian Party and fight for that issue within that party while enjoying far more like-minded company on fiscal restraint and individual liberty.

I agree with much of what Brandon said, but I suspect I’m more hawkish than he is.

Libertarianism is about freedom; and freedom is a dynamic and pervasive thing, you can’t limit it to the economic sphere. Fiscal conservatism is the main thing that binds libertarians and conservatives, and social conservatives are increasing spenders; often voting for agricultural subsidies and costly military and security operations that libertarians see as misguided.

I would argue that if the GOP wants to really be big tent it will get back to its fiscally conservative, constitutional roots while making social issues secondary. Everyone in the GOP can agree that government is too big, and that is a rallying point.

As for libertarians, the best thing is to work together outside of the party system to gain electoral muscle, and bring both parties in toward more sanity with the power of the “liberty” swing vote.

The main argument should be that Republicans stand for LESS government and more freedom. How does the anti-abortion stand fit these mandates? It is polar opposite! They do not fit in the Republican Party.

As the neighboring comments by Ross Kaminsky who said, which is so true, “..when the socal conservatives distract from the mission of the Republicans (less government, less taxes) they become the arsonists burning the big tent down.”

The sensible Republicans have turned to their co-dependent, mentally-ill, outmoded, pulpit pounding spouses and have said, “I’m sorry honey, this just isn’t working out anymore. I need to see other people. I know you do too,” and then filed for divorce in the voting booth.

The Republicans who are entrepreneurs who want less barriers to innovation in business are naturally opposed to flat-earthers who think the earth is 6,000 years old.

People who work hard for less frivolous government spending are not the people who think gay-marriage is something to campaign about.

If your goal is a better economy in which Americans have greater opportunities, legislating a morality based on superstition and subjective interpretations of historically molested texts is not naturally part of your political agenda.