Thanks for accepting member feedback. I have found that when I remain neutral, all parties seem to think I am on their side unless I am explicitly vocal about my neutrality and what it means. If the NSN remains neutral then we need to speak publicly about it. What makes Georgia a higher stake is the severity of the issue. By choosing to remaining neutral, we would honor the diversity of our membership and our mission. But in this case the issue has clauses that move beyond politics and religion and into a human rights issue. That’s where I step away from neutrality as an individual. Does the NSN have a limitation on its policy of neutrality?