I have one principle I really hold dear, and that is the idea that
differences in opinion do not have to parlay into personal conflict.  I have
as much a right to my opinions as do you, and we both need to respect each
other's rights to see things differently.  On many subjects we may need to
agree to disagree.  In such situations, the majority rules, and the minority
continues to present a thoughtful oposing view which keeps the majority from
becomming tyranical or complacent.  That's how democracy works. That is how
the group conscience works. I would hate to see the current debate get
reduced to a cult of warring personalities.  Politics and debate are an
inevitable part of life and don't have to be acrimonious -- although it is
tempting to nurse resentments as long as some of us nurse our children.

There are good people on both sides of the current debate -- people we all
respect.  I suspect some are quite surprised to have suddenly found
themselves in the middle of such a fierce storm over what probably seemed
like dull, parlimentarian stuff.  I know that personally, my eyes glaze over
when handed by-laws and such.  I try to care because I know they are
important...  Anyway, I am generally  happy to delegate these tasks and
would have missed the fine points of the current debate had not others
mentioned them. Now that the issues have been pointed out to me, I would
like to hear more information before I vote.

Lets all agree on one thing:  we can hold a civil debate.  Arguments should
be presented as cogently and forcefully as possible. (For instance, someone
needs to convince me, because I am totally confused.)  But lets not assume
of one another that failure to agree is testimony of personal hostility or
evil intent. Or that coming down on one side rather than the other is an
insult to our friends who decide differently. You know, another way to look
at this business is that it is pretty exciting to have so many people in an
organization this heated up about how it's organized.  I think that says a
LOT for our mutual committment to ILCA.  It is a very good sign for our
profession.  If we are not passionate about discovering who we are and what
we stand for, we will never endure.

I vote for a delay in the decision with more time for discussion. Civilized
Discussion. With a mututal committment from to stick to issues not focus on
personalities.
Barbara

Barbara Wilson-Clay, BS, IBCLC
Private Practice, Austin, Texas
Owner, Lactnews On-Line Conference Page
http://moontower.com/bwc/lactnews.html